Cannabis testing in the workplace: the CCMA got it wrong

daveza

daveza

Honorary Master
Joined
Apr 5, 2004
Messages
49,866
Reaction score
21,624
Location
Durbanville, Cape Town
https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/opi...sting-in-the-workplace-the-ccma-got-it-wrong/

The issue of testing was raised in a thread when cannabis was ruled okay to use in the privacy of your own home.

How do you legislate work safety when there is no test for being under the influence as there is with alcohol.

Pierre de Vos points this out correctly - and the CCMA did indeed get it wrong.

Expect a lot more on this subject.


The ruling handed down last year by South Africa’s Constitutional Court that it was unconstitutional to criminalise the private cultivation and use of cannabis (dagga), appropriately left it to Parliament to pass legislation further to regulate the matter. Meanwhile, it is now legal to cultivate and use cannabis in private – although the legislature must still define what would be considered a 'private' space. However, recently the Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration (CCMA) upheld the dismissal of several employees who tested positive for cannabis. I believe the CCMA got it wrong, primarily because it did not understand how cannabis testing works and what is being tested.
Click to expand...
....


The correct legal position must be that an employee cannot be dismissed for being under the influence of dagga at work merely because a urine test detected traces of cannabis in his or her urine. Unless the employer can prove that the employee was under the influence of dagga while at work (something that cannot be done by using a urine test), it would normally not be legally permitted to dismiss that employee for substance abuse or for being under the influence of dagga at work

Just as it would not be reasonable to prohibit an employee from drinking any alcohol in the days or weeks before they come to work, it would not be reasonable for most employers to prohibit employees from using cannabis in the days or weeks before they come to work.
Click to expand...
 
Some jobs may require a degree of attentiveness that may preclude any use of cannabis in the few days before an employee has to work. Flying a passenger plane might be such a job. In such cases, it may be reasonable for an employer to adopt a rule that testing positive for traces of cannabis in your urine is a dismissible offence in all cases.
Click to expand...

Next thing, de Vos blames the evil capitalist wood chipper for not enforcing enough safety standards at their factory when one of their workers gets turned into a hamburger.
 
daveza said:
Problem is there isn't one, nor is there legal measure for intoxication as there is for alcohol.
Click to expand...

Yeah I know... but there is the reliance on the test for the presence.... and with the appropriately worded contract, that would be enough for many companies.
 
Since the "lifespan" of trace amounts differ between substances it would require a tailor made test or some form of determining sobriety ,it is unfair to test urine or blood when cannabis stays in those for many times more than booze while not interfering with thought or action.
If you smoked one joint and were actually high for 2-3 weeks (the supposed time frame it is detectable in urine according to stories iv been told) it would be the cheapest drug ever per hit.
 
I wonder when we will be able to go to work blow in the same tester that they test for alcohol but for THC.?

I have had to do drug tests , and failed on the THC side. If you smoke daily and for the last couple years your looking at around 77 days to be clear .....

The hard drugs are in and out of the body with in a week !

All I want is to show that I didn't smoke before or during work , just like the guys who drink after work they don't drink during or before work.
 
Would be interested to see if there are studies that show if smoking weed has any impact on your abilities 48 hours later.

If I smoke a joint on a Friday night I'm still going to have traces in my urine on a Monday morning.
 
SAguy said:
Would be interested to see if there are studies that show if smoking weed has any impact on your abilities 48 hours later.

If I smoke a joint on a Friday night I'm still going to have traces in my urine on a Monday morning.
Click to expand...
I dont doubt that some of the stronger strains could actually affect you for a day or two , but the stuff most people get off their merchant is not going to be very potent , if its got seeds in it chances are its less potent than it could have been .
It should be treated the same as booze and tests for its use within the last 10-12 hours should be developed before allowing companies to dismiss people for what could have been some balm rubbed into a scar or an actual joint while they were on leave.
 
Agree that the urine testing method is wrong as it does not prove intoxication instead only shows that THC has been ingested within a a period of roughly 3-30 days.

Someone needs to fight this in a court so that companies are forced to change the urine test to a saliva test , saliva test will be able to show if an employee has used within a period of 24 hours.
 
diesel said:
Agree that the urine testing method is wrong as it does not prove intoxication instead only shows that THC has been ingested within a a period of roughly 3-30 days.

Someone needs to fight this in a court so that companies are forced to change the urine test to a saliva test , saliva test will be able to show if an employee has used within a period of 24 hours.
Click to expand...

How will the saliva test solve anything? It does not determine intoxication from your description of it.
 
ambroseg1 said:
How will the saliva test solve anything? It does not determine intoxication from your description of it.
Click to expand...

Well it detects THC that has entered your system within a 24 hour period , currently urine tests detect THC in your system up to 30 days after use depending how regular the user uses it.

so you can be fired for smoking a joint 2 weeks ago at a party and not actually be high , the saliva test will be able to narrow it down, so if you smoked a joint before coming to work or the night before you will be positive.
 
diesel said:
Well it detects THC that has entered your system within a 24 hour period , currently urine tests detect THC in your system up to 30 days after use depending how regular the user uses it.

so you can be fired for smoking a joint 2 weeks ago at a party and not actually be high , the saliva test will be able to narrow it down, so if you smoked a joint before coming to work or the night before you will be positive.
Click to expand...
Which still does not even remotely come close to proving intoxicity or impairment and is thus just as useless a test.
 
ambroseg1 said:
Which still does not even remotely come close to proving intoxicity or impairment and is thus just as useless a test.
Click to expand...

better than urine test. pheraps you should come up with a solution seeing as you're so smart?
 
diesel said:
better than urine test. pheraps you should come up with a solution seeing as you're so smart?
Click to expand...
How can one useless idea be better than another? And how does pointing out its uselessness mean I am responsible to come up with a solution? Butthurt?

The obvious solution is the same as with alcohol. They need to determine at what level of cannabis in the blood does one become impaired. And they need to derive a test that indiates at that time if a person has that amount or less or more in their blood. Or urine. Or wherever they want to measure from.
 
ambroseg1 said:
How can one useless idea be better than another? And how does pointing out its uselessness mean I am responsible to come up with a solution? Butthurt?

The obvious solution is the same as with alcohol. They need to determine at what level of cannabis in the blood does one become impaired. And they need to derive a test that indiates at that time if a person has that amount or less or more in their blood. Or urine. Or wherever they want to measure from.
Click to expand...

Sounds reasonable, you can lead the way to get funding for a team of scientists to develop an instant test to detect if a person is high on weed and then lets fast track it through the tests and the world health organisation approval and then take on the government to change the law.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X