Ask a Manager: Can I Find Out If An Employer Drug Tests

[minoanmiss]

2. Can I find out if an employer drug tests? After many years as a bar manager, I switched gears for an office job post-Covid. I’ve been looking for a permanent position (I’m a temp right now) and recently accepted a great offer. At the end of the call, they told me I was being emailed a link to go for a drug test — a test that included THC. I was surprised since I’m in a marijuana legal state, and there had been no mention of drug testing (I’m an administrative assistant, not for a government agency).

I was candid with HR that I am a medical CBD and recreational marijuana user, and expressed respectful surprise that they test for THC in a state where it’s legal. HR said she wanted to “have a serious discussion with legal” and asked if I would take the test anyway, as there was a chance they may be able to move forward if that was the only barrier. I agreed, but was not optimistic.

As expected, they decided to maintain their testing requirements “as of the moment,” so when I came back positive they formally rescinded the offer. No problem, I figured it was coming. I was fortunate enough to get another great offer yesterday and … they gave me the same drug test requirement right behind the offer letter. I plan to call later today and tell their HR the same thing I told the previous HR, with the expectation that this offer will also be rescinded.

How can I find out if an employer tests for THC before beginning the application process, or can I? I’m thinking that if I call and say, “Do you drug test?” before sending a resume, it’s going right into the garbage, and it’s not something posted on the company website. Is there anything to do for this, or is everyone just going to keep getting interview practice until I get an employer that doesn’t test for THC?

Yeah, unfortunately there’s no great way for most people to ask about drug testing at the outset of a hiring process. (Although if you have really in-demand skills, there can be more leeway — you have more capital to just state your needs outright at the start.) Frankly, it sucks — you should be able to screen for that the same way you might ask if a position includes benefits or what the typical hours are. And with an increasing number of states having legalized marijuana, both medically and recreationally, and attitudes changing quickly, that fact that this is still treated as a taboo question feels very much like a relic of an earlier time. (I bet we’ll see that change in coming years though, and there will be more acceptance of people asking about it up-front … and the more people who are willing to do it, the faster that will change … but understandably people don’t want to risk their own job searches in the service of effecting wider societal change.)

So, where does that leave you? If you’re applying to large companies, often you can find out online whether or not they drug test (search the name of the company and “drug test”). If they’re a government contractor and you’re going to need a security clearance, assume they do. Smaller companies can be safer bets and are less likely to spring it on you at the last minute, but there’s no guarantee that they won’t. There are also some industries where you really don’t see it (like much of tech, where they’d struggle to attract employees if they drug tested) and some industries where you’re more likely to (transportation, for example, even if you’re not in a transportation role yourself). And you can check Glassdoor, which may or may not have info. But it’s tricky, and there’s no good answer.

Comments

Best comment

[minoanmiss]

Kellbell*
April 8, 2022 at 12:28 am
LW2 You might be able to pull off an interview question along the lines of “If I were to get an offer, what does the screening process for new hires look like as far as background checks, finger printing, drug tests, etc, and how long do you typically find that takes to complete?” I work with kids, so some kind of background check is a given, but the full process can vary a lot from company to company, so I wouldn’t find a question like this odd at all. And if you roll the drug test in among other things maybe it won’t stand out as much? You still might go through a little extra effort interviewing to get to the point where you can ask this, but at least you wouldn’t have to wait all the way until the offer letter.

Re: Best comment

[bikergeek]

On the other hand, if you ask that, they may wonder what you're afraid might come up. There are things that are a lot worse than a bit of casual marijuana use. Like a criminal conviction that you didn't disclose. Something that's not quite a felony, but would be a serious misdemeanor indicative of moral turpitude.

Re: Best comment

[lemonsharks]

The trick is "so I know what kind time suck I need to plan for/so I can plan accordingly and give it the time it needs"--a third party don't have to go anywhere background check is a different logistical thing than "go to the place and pee in a cup"

Re: Best comment

[bikergeek]

Makes sense. I was thinking from the standpoint of, "If you don't give them information, people will assume the worst."

Like, if you ask, "What kind of drug testing do you do?", they might assume you're a marijuana user. If you ask about credit checks, they'll assume you went bankrupt or had a car repo'd or something. If you ask about background checks generally, they might assume you have some kind of criminal history, or a history of association with known criminals or gang members, or something else questionable.

Re: Best comment

[lemonsharks]

Yeah, you have to gently redirect them back to assuming the best about you, like by bringing up "respectable" types of debt when you ask about credit checks (student loans, generally, or "yeah, I bought my house in 2006 and we all remember what that did to everyone's credit") or by making it look like you have a "respectable" reason to ask/share information.

I've had so many interviews in the last six months, but so far only one has seen through my "long passionate talk about what my educational plans after undergrad were" to ask directly if I got my undergrad degree.

If the interviewee isn't good at that kind of social engineering misdirection they're better off omitting as much unnecessary information as they can.

Re: Best comment

[jamoche]

I had to unlock the credit check services the last time I had a background check, and that delayed the whole process by a week. So it's something I might ask about in an interview.

Re: Best comment

[bikergeek]

That's another stupid one and AFAIK it's only a US thing: Credit checks for jobs where you're not handling money or making fiduciary decisions on behalf of your employer. That's what took over in the 2000s when drug tests kinda faded into the background.

Re: Best comment

[jamoche]

Yeah, the whole credit check industry feels very protection-racket to me: "That's a nice credit score ya got there, shame if anything were to ... happen to it."

Re: Best comment

[bikergeek]

That's only partially the fault of the credit reporting agencies. What happened was that landlords, employers, and so forth started using FICO score as a generalized marker for responsibility and trustworthiness. That's way the hell outside of FICO's original remit. It was only ever intended to signify the likelihood that you'd pay back money you'd borrowed. It *is* the CRA's fault for allowing that sort of use.

Re: Best comment

[adrian_turtle]

If you ask about credit checks, they'll assume you went bankrupt or had a car repo'd or something.

Or that you locked down your credit record and will let them see it briefly if you're sure they aren't identity thieves. I pulled that one on a potential landlord and left him admiring my caution with money before he even saw the credit report.

Re: Best comment

[cimorene]

Oh, good point.

[likeaduck]

Can I just do some non-USian reacting that this whole situation is baffling? Drug testing as a requirement for being hired at an office job seems wild to me.

[melannen]

As a USian, I'm baffled that it's okay to do a THC test as a job requirement in a state where medical marijuana is legal. Shouldn't using medication as authorized by a doctor be covered under ADA or medical privacy laws?

But I guess most of that is federal law, and the federal government still thinks marijuana is illegal everywhere, because the US is a mess.

[adrian_turtle]

It absolutely sucks. The problem is that marijuana is still forbidden under federal law. It is legally classified as having no medical use. Doctors who prescribe it can lose their licenses and (technically, at least) be prosecuted. Until last week, it was against federal law to even do research on medical uses, because it was defined as having no possible medical uses. Doctors don't officially prescribe it, exactly...they just sort of suggest that patients take it themselves. And some (many) states agree not to prosecute.

[cereta]

I think the problem is that LW uses CBD (which doesn't get you even a little high) medically, but THC recreationally, and THC is what most drug tests test for. If someone is using THC medically, I think, think a letter/form from a doctor would resolve the issue. I did have to do a pee test for a background check, and went armed with a letter saying I take opioids medically.

That said, testing for THC at all, much less in a place where it's legal, is both ignorant and usually) hypocritical; how many of the bosses at these places drink alcohol? I think it's probably going to take until at least GenX, if not millennials, getting into the board rooms for this to change. In the meantime, depending on how often LW uses THC and in what amounts, stopping the THC about a week before the drug test and drinking a ton of water during that week, would at least give them a fighting chance.

[synecdochic]

If someone is using THC medically, I think, think a letter/form from a doctor would resolve the issue.

Nope. Employers are free to discriminate against marijuana users, even those who have a 'prescription' (it's actually a recommendation, as adrian_turtle said), if they'd like. The ADA is what says employers can't discriminate against you for your prescriptions even if they show up on a drug test result because they are (or are similar to) a controlled substance, and the ADA is a federal law. Marijuana is still illegal federally and so the ADA doesn't cover it.

(My wife, for instance, would benefit greatly from medical marijuana, but even though we're a legal med state on track to become a legal recreational state next election by ballot referendum, she works for the county government and they forbid all employees from having a med card and drug test randomly. Perfectly legal, and will remain perfectly legal even after we legalize recreational.)

If you're a daily or even several-times-a-week user, THC will show up in urine screens for 30-40 days: a week won't cut it. It's actually one of the big obstacles to federal legalization, because there's no way to assess "is this person currently under the influence of THC or did they smoke up last weekend while they weren't on the job" other than visual observation, because the metabolites stay in your system for so long!

[bikergeek]

This arose as the result of a bunch of things in the '80s:

1. Reagan-era escalation of the War On Users of Untaxed Drugs
2. A passenger train collision in 1987 that resulted in 16 deaths, in which the primary cause of the collision was determined to be a train driver's use of marijuana on the job
3. Invention of inexpensive, mostly-accurate tests such as EMIT and RIA that could detect recent marijuana use. These weren't a thing prior to about the late '80s.
4. Declining competitiveness by US businesses, mostly in manufacturing, versus those from the Pacific Rim and especially Japan, which had US business owners looking for some kind of "magic bullet" that could restore US competitiveness to its postwar levels. "What are you people, on dope?" was a facile, appealing, yet wrong answer.
5. The late '80s-early '90s recession, which led to a surplus of job candidates. Drug tests were a ready, low-effort way to winnow down the list of candidates for employment. It's worth noting that drug testing declined during the tight labor market of the late '90s, made a strong comeback in the 2008 Great Recession, and seems to be fading away again.

And I should add that the whole thing still makes no sense to me for non safety related jobs. (like, where you're driving a transit bus or something)

[lemonsharks]

Thank you for the additional context! I was not around for this stuff and so I only have a 30,000 foot understanding of how things were in the 80s and early 90s

[mommy]

I've noticed that drug testing is more common with lower paying jobs. Drug tests happened whenever I got through the application process for chain retail and hospitality jobs, but not when I applied to law firms. It's one of the reasons I was surprised to see a drug test for the office job the LW applied to.

[bikergeek]

Yeah, there's very much a "Know your place, peasant" element to the whole thing.

[cereta]

Also a "you can be replaced." Most of these jobs require little if any training prior to actually starting the job, so employers can throw up all kinds of hoops.* If you're hiring for a position that requires specific education/training/experience, the pool is a lot smaller, so employers are going to avoid something that might muck up getting the candidate they want. It's stupid and classist as hell.

[lilysea]

And I should add that the whole thing still makes no sense to me for non safety related jobs. (like, where you're driving a transit bus or something)

Yeah, I agree.

In Australia, the only jobs I've heard about requiring drug tests were

a) mining where you are dealing with heavy duty mining equipment (trucks, earthmovers, explosives and similar) where people could easily die if someone's reaction times are impaired. This is REGULAR ongoing testing throughout the whole duration of the job, not just at the point of the job interview.

b) a friend of mine failed her (regular, ongoing) drug test due to her great love of (non-drug) poppyseed bread from a mainstream commercial bakery - she worked as an analytical chemist for a mining company, working with dangerous chemicals and dangerous lab equipment

when she explained she ate a lot of poppyseed bread, they told her to avoid the bread for X weeks and then re-test.

She'd been working for the mining company for years and it was the first time she'd failed the test.

[lemonsharks]

Culinary poppyseeds are the seeds of the opium poppy. You'd have to grind and consume kilos and kilos of it to get high, which no one actually does because consuming kilos of poppyseeds all at once is the opposite of a good time.

[likeaduck]

Ooof yeah, it really does have the feel of control for the sake of control/because they can, rather than anything that makes sense, yeah? US employment law is baffling.

[lemonsharks]

Marijuana is still illegal at the federal level, although there's legislation in Congress now to legalize it.

Federally, it's classed as follows:

Schedule I drugs, substances, or chemicals are defined as drugs with no currently accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse. Some examples of Schedule I drugs are: heroin, lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD), marijuana (cannabis), 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (ecstasy), methaqualone, and peyote.

If the business does any work outside of their state, has to comply with any federal regulations, or if the owners are just medium to particularly conservative it's not surprising that they would require employees pass a drug test. IME drug testing is most common in retail, pharma/pharma-adjacent education/childcare/childcare adjacent, and financial/adjacent jobs. Additionally, drug testing including for marijuana gets more common in more industries the more conservative the area gets.

Personally, I loathe marijuana aesthetically (it is both a migraine and a trauma trigger for me), but I also have at least two braincells to rub together and I do not agree that it belongs in schedule 1; weed was specifically put there to make marijuana users look scary and disreputable to upper/middle class white america. (see also: crack and powder cocaine are classified differently, and their classifications fall on racist, classist lines.)

[likeaduck]

The idea that employers can require a drug test based on essentially personal preference? the whimsy of the moment? is what's wild to me. Like, workers in the US really don't have privacy rights, is what it tells me.

[lemonsharks]

You are not wrong about workers' rights being extremely eroded.

[cereta]

Something for LW (if they read here) to file for the future: there are very few controls on CBD is made. I tested positive for THC because the day and night before the routine test (that I did not know I was going to have to do that day), I'd consumed several CBD tablets. LW could get a positive result just from the CBD. That said, that can work in their favor. If they can get a doctor to supply a letter saying that the CBD was medical, and information on cross...contamination is the wrong word, but you get the idea.

I dunno. Personally, I would just give up the marijuana while I was job-searching. I'd say that's easy for me to say when I seriously dislike the way marijuana makes me feel, but I did enjoy me a nice glass of wine or shot of tequila, and I've been able to give up alcohol for things like being pregnant and having meds that it doesn't mix well with. I do miss that glass of wine, though.

[ekaterinn]

It sucks that this is likely the best answer, especially since LW is using CBD for medical purposes, so they would have to give up their medical usage as well as the recreational usage.