What happens if you flunk a random drug test?

[smilePRN]

We had a pharmacy student interview for a tech position and really impressed everyone. Great personality, decent resume, seemed coachable - they were the perfect fit. Pharmacy director was blown away and even had plans to keep them on as an rph once they graduated in a couple years. They accept the job and the pre-employment drug screen comes back positive. They outright deny it and somehow get a second chance (didn't know that was even an option). Well - it comes back positive, again. IDK if they thought they wouldn't get screened for a tech position, or if they thought they had flushed it out already, or if people (pharmacy students specifically) are just that stupid nowadays. Why even bother wasting our time with a second screen if you know it'll still be positive and what makes them think getting employment in the pharmacy is even possible without a negative drug screen lol

I've never been into these kinds of things so it wouldn't be an issue for me but it got me thinking - what happens if you are already employed and you flunk a random drug screen? Immediate termination? Does that go on some sort of record with the board? At my place, a couple employees are randomly selected every 6(?) months for random screens and they have to go that day (I think corporate gives a few days to get it done, but local management makes you go before the end of the day). Is random testing common or do most places just stick to the pre-employment ones?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[rph3664]

It depends on where you work, if the employee has a history of erratic behavior, etc.

 

[PharmDBro2017]

Not sure if it varies by state, but I believe it must be reported to our pharmacy board here.

What did they pop positive for?

 

[Sine Cura]

Got a lot of dum-dums in the world thinking they can work in a pharmacy while smoking weed all the time because "it's legal."

 

[lord999]

For a positive urinalysis, there almost always is a confirmatory to make sure that it is not a fluke, that is actually standard procedure. In several states, it is an automatic board report if confirmed and there are major consequences to non-reporting and having that person caught later. Hope that intern has some cash laying around as he or she is spending it on impaired practitioners rehab if that person wants to keep in the profession.

Not legal advice, but impairment is different than theft. If you come in impaired, you probably have a good ADA argument to get treated as addiction is a disability. Take it from someone who had an employee with a Navy-sized drinking problem, it's actually pretty much impossible to fire someone with impairment issues unless patient care was highly affected (incident report) or refuses treatment. This is especially true of alcoholics who show up impaired or pot smokers. However, if you stole from your workplace to be high, that doesn't go over too well and getting fired is the first of several disciplinary steps with the likely suspension or revocation to follow.

There is a quiet movement to NOT test especially if you "know" that this person is harmless as the liability concerns are less to not test. Management tries to overlook it when possible as it's a personnel failure on their part. That isn't to say that it can't be used as blackmail, but it's a big problem for management as they have to do all the Schedule counts and discrepancies as well.

(And, there is a part of me that can't wait for @Sparda29 's response).

 

[PromisedNeverland]

Not sure if it varies by state, but I believe it must be reported to our pharmacy board here.

What did they pop positive for?

probably mary j

 

[PromisedNeverland]

We had a pharmacy student interview for a tech position and really impressed everyone. Great personality, decent resume, seemed coachable - they were the perfect fit. Pharmacy director was blown away and even had plans to keep them on as an rph once they graduated in a couple years. They accept the job and the pre-employment drug screen comes back positive. They outright deny it and somehow get a second chance (didn't know that was even an option). Well - it comes back positive, again. IDK if they thought they wouldn't get screened for a tech position, or if they thought they had flushed it out already, or if people (pharmacy students specifically) are just that stupid nowadays. Why even bother wasting our time with a second screen if you know it'll still be positive and what makes them think getting employment in the pharmacy is even possible without a negative drug screen lol

I've never been into these kinds of things so it wouldn't be an issue for me but it got me thinking - what happens if you are already employed and you flunk a random drug screen? Immediate termination? Does that go on some sort of record with the board? At my place, a couple employees are randomly selected every 6(?) months for random screens and they have to go that day (I think corporate gives a few days to get it done, but local management makes you go before the end of the day). Is random testing common or do most places just stick to the pre-employment ones?

don't do drugs kid mmmmmmkay

 

[Sparda29]

For a positive urinalysis, there almost always is a confirmatory to make sure that it is not a fluke, that is actually standard procedure. In several states, it is an automatic board report if confirmed and there are major consequences to non-reporting and having that person caught later. Hope that intern has some cash laying around as he or she is spending it on impaired practitioners rehab if that person wants to keep in the profession.

Not legal advice, but impairment is different than theft. If you come in impaired, you probably have a good ADA argument to get treated as addiction is a disability. Take it from someone who had an employee with a Navy-sized drinking problem, it's actually pretty much impossible to fire someone with impairment issues unless patient care was highly affected (incident report) or refuses treatment. This is especially true of alcoholics who show up impaired or pot smokers. However, if you stole from your workplace to be high, that doesn't go over too well and getting fired is the first of several disciplinary steps with the likely suspension or revocation to follow.

There is a quiet movement to NOT test especially if you "know" that this person is harmless as the liability concerns are less to not test. Management tries to overlook it when possible as it's a personnel failure on their part. That isn't to say that it can't be used as blackmail, but it's a big problem for management as they have to do all the Schedule counts and discrepancies as well.

(And, there is a part of me that can't wait for @Sparda29 's response).

You're prolly screwed if you test positive twice for the pre-employment.

If you have smoked weed in the 90 days prior to interviewing for a job, don't take the chance with just trying to be super hydrated and then giving in a dilute urine sample because they might just ask you to pee again because the sample was too dilute. There are synthetic urines out there that get past the test.

If you're hunting for a job or know a drug test is coming up in 90 days, just abstain from weed until afterwards. You don't want to get caught with the synthetic urine either (there are temperature requirements to urine samples, so it's also tricky to keep it at body temperature). If the person collecting the sample sees that its not between 93-100F, they are gonna get suspicious.)

 

[BenJammin]

Do drug testing companies not contact you first when you test positive for something? I tested positive for codeine when I was applying for pharmacy school but I was also going through pneumonia so I had the documentation to prove it wasn't abuse. They called me to alert me, I forwarded them a record from the pharmacy showing my prescription, and the school was told I passed.

 

[PharmDBro2017]

probably mary j

Pfft who cares then

 

[aqb]

Companies still care about weed?

 

[Sparda29]

Companies still care about weed?

I guess so, until there is a federal law prohibiting employers from testing for marijuana on drug screens. This is the law in NYC now with exceptions for certain employees (those with federal and state grants, police officers, telecoms, AAA drivers).

 

[smilePRN]

What did they pop positive for?

They didn't tell us I was really curious though!

 

[smilePRN]

Do drug testing companies not contact you first when you test positive for something? I tested positive for codeine when I was applying for pharmacy school but I was also going through pneumonia so I had the documentation to prove it wasn't abuse. They called me to alert me, I forwarded them a record from the pharmacy showing my prescription, and the school was told I passed.

I guess there was some sort of communication between the testing company, the hiring agency and the applicant since it was "under review" for about a week after each test. I'm guessing there was no rx to back it up, thats why it was ultimately reported as a positive to us

don't do drugs kid mmmmmmkay

Didn't think we'd have to explain that to 'professional pharmacy students' lol

For a positive urinalysis, there almost always is a confirmatory to make sure that it is not a fluke, that is actually standard procedure.

I want to hope that the confirmatory test is not another urinalysis, its a hair follicle test or something...

 

[rph3664]

(And, there is a part of me that can't wait for @Sparda29 's response).

That's why I chose the smilie I did.

 

[zelman]

I want to hope that the confirmatory test is not another urinalysis, its a hair follicle test or something...

It’s the same sample. They just use gas chromatography instead of ELISA.

 

[RxPreceptor]

don't do drugs kid mmmmmmkay