|
What happens if you fail a drug test? What do they test for?
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 21:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 02:16 |
|
|
The offer was contingent on passing. I didn't ask what they tested for. I'm also An Old and this was a long time ago, haven't had a test since that first job.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 21:24
|
|
|
return0 posted:What happens if you fail a drug test? What do they test for? Usually everything. Speed, cocaine, marijuana, MDMA, heroin. If you fail it, recruiters don't bother calling you back.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 21:25
|
|
|
JawnV6 posted:This is the one you asked to bump your date out? They might just be taking it a little slower because they know you're not under time pressure. Yup, looks like this is it. The recruiter got back to me today to tell me they were still moving forward.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2015 00:54
|
|
|
Odette posted:Usually everything. Speed, cocaine, marijuana, MDMA, heroin. This is generally untrue. Most places only test for the common things: weed, coke, and regular meth. More esoteric things like MDMA cost extra and very few places care that much.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2015 02:07
|
|
|
Thanks to the TCC Mock thread I know there are 2 standard urine tests: 5 Panel -
Even the second is really rare in terms of employment screening; this stuff isn't cheap. There's plenty of research online that will tell you how long any particular drug stays at testable levels in your system. It's absurdly low, generally measured in days, which should give you a hint as to the kinds of people who fail these tests. Bhodi fucked around with this message at 02:40 on Mar 14, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2015 02:34
|
|
|
Bhodi posted:Thanks to the TCC Mock thread I know there are 2 standard urine tests: It's the other way around, MDMA is a special class amphetamine that's not tested for in a standard five panel. Also there's a lot of mitigating factors with weed in your urine, so it's best to give yourself a month or so if you expect to be tested.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2015 03:55
|
|
|
Whoops! Need to spend more time on erowid or blacklight or whatever. Please don't take drug advice from forums, TIA
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2015 05:07
|
|
|
JawnV6 posted:Alternatively, big organizations can have odd rules around an offer going out, such as fixed timelines for other actions to be taken after that. One of my first offers was contingent on passing a drug test and they were really strange about it. The HR rep called and said "we will definitely be giving you An Offer on Monday, after which you'll have 48 hours to get screened at Y". I didn't really care when it happened, but I assume others might appreciate being able to schedule such a thing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2015 06:29
|
|
Failed Sega Accessory Ahoy!
|
Sloppy Milkshake posted:It's the other way around, MDMA is a special class amphetamine that's not tested for in a standard five panel. Also there's a lot of mitigating factors with weed in your urine, so it's best to give yourself a month or so if you expect to be tested. This is probably true but the thing to actually keep in mind is that modern MDMA like substances are very likely cut (or entirely switched) with something that will test as amphetamines on the standard drug test. With the rise of "designer" drugs and the still high popularity of pills, and the fact there are hundreds of different types of meth like drugs which can seem like MDMA to people just interested in getting high, it is a very dumb decision to use any sort of illegal drugs before you interview for a new job. Only a little more dumb than taking specific advice about drug testing in Cavern of COBOL.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2015 20:06
|
|
|
Newbie Programming Interviews/Get a Job Megathread: Make sure the unit AND drug tests pass
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2015 23:26
|
|
|
Why would you ever work a white collar job that's in such demand and actually submit to a drug test unless your job required some kind of clearance? Drug tests are just a way of your potential employer telling you they don't trust you. Why would you ever want to work for a place that doesn't trust you?
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2015 02:11
|
|
|
Because they pay you a lot of money and big corporations often have mandatory on-hire drug testing?
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2015 02:30
|
|
|
Bhodi posted:Because they pay you a lot of money and big corporations often have mandatory on-hire drug testing? Yeah, I consult and sometimes big companies require it even for contractors. The first time, my boss asked me "Will you pass? It's cool if the answer is no, I'll give them a later start date." Working for Canadians is awesome.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2015 02:44
|
|
|
Bhodi posted:Because they pay you a lot of money and big corporations often have mandatory on-hire drug testing? Yeah but the skillset is in demand enough that you could find another place that will pay a lot of money and not require a drug test.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2015 02:52
|
|
|
Or I could just take a drug test and then their money because I like the pay / commute / benefits / incidentals / people I interviewed with / some other reason that is comparable with "going without" for a month or hey maybe just don't do drugs at all if you want a white collar job.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2015 02:54
|
|
|
So I'm 9 months into my first job. About a month ago my boss told me he was going to put me up for a promotion (junior programmer -> full programmer) in the next yearly promotion cycle, which happens a month from now, so I prepared an application and he submitted it. Some dumb corporate poo poo happened in the meantime and the company put a freeze on promotions. I assumed that meant the end of it, but this week my boss took me in for a one on one and said "Look, there's a freeze on promotions and I can't promise anything, but me and my boss are pushing hard for your promotion. HR is pushing back but obviously you're top talent and we realise you could be making more elsewhere so we're very eager to retain you." I'm not sure how to handle the situation. Ironically the fact that they want to pay me more to retain me makes me want to leave. The pay raise is not insignificant (~30% raise, non-negotiable) but they wouldn't be offering it so readily unless they thought I could be making at least that somewhere else. My job is comfy but not very challenging and the pay is on the relatively low side. The perks and work environment are good but not great - I'd trade them for higher pay. I've also hit the point where I've mastered any skills I could pick up from there (there's tons more to learn, but I could do that at another organisation). It's a pretty big decision to go seeking other work so I want to get as much info as I can. My thinking is pretty simple. If I don't get the promotion, I can definitely be making more elsewhere, so I should interview around. If I do get the promotion, I could maybe be making more elsewhere, so I should be interviewing around with the better negotiating position afforded to me by the promotion. Instead of 'this job or unemployment' it's 'this job or the job I currently have', so there's no pressure to find work and I can just cherrypick the good jobs. Does all of that sound about right? My biggest worry is that 9 months on the job before leaving will look terrible on my resume. Is there kind of a special exemption because it's my first job? If so, would I be obligated to do 18 months/2 years in the new job? I plan on leaving (and not returning to) my city in about a years time.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2015 08:56
|
|
|
Get the promotion, keep shopping for jobs. If you find a better one, take it. If they don't want you because of those 9 months, which isn't such a big deal, then no harm done. Just don't quit the first job before you get a written offer about your next one.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2015 09:38
|
|
|
Flashing Twelve posted:My biggest worry is that 9 months on the job before leaving will look terrible on my resume. Is there kind of a special exemption because it's my first job? If so, would I be obligated to do 18 months/2 years in the new job? I plan on leaving (and not returning to) my city in about a years time. It looks bad if you make a habit out of it - you'll be seen as a "job hopper" - but one or two short stints probably won't hurt you much. There's no exact number or consensus or anything, every decision-maker is going to have their own threshold. It should be noted that contract work generally doesn't count here, since there are a berjillion 3 and 6 month contract positions. No, you're not obligated to work longer at one job to make up for a short job, but your employment history does say something about you, and a bunch of non-contract sub-year jobs is probably going to say "flaky, can't commit, unreliable" to a bunch of hiring managers and decision makers. There's no harm in interviewing elsewhere, really, you may get a really good offer or the opportunity to work in a really interesting industry that you hadn't considered. But I wouldn't use an offer to strongarm your current employer into a raise, especially if you're on decent terms with them. They could give you a raise and then fire your rear end 3 months later after they find a replacement for your traitorous rear end (you aren't a traitor, some managers and executives just have huge egos and take things personally, but you're still fired). That said, if you're planning on moving away in a year anyway, and your current job environment is pleasant, and your compensation is okay, my tentative advice would be to stick it out in your case. Unless you're extraordinarily lucky, you're going to run into a really awful bully of a boss, or an open-plan office where the marketing people and their phones are sat next to all the developers, or a really toxic system of office politics, or an abusive pay cut, sometime in the future. You do NOT want to feel like you have to continue working for a terrible company just to prevent yourself from looking like a job hopper. If this job is decent, especially since it's your first job, try and keep at it. My advice starts changing if they start heaping a ton of extra work on you or insisting on you staying late or working weekends a lot, without also giving you a raise/promotion.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2015 09:56
|
|
|
There is literally never a situation where telling your boss/employer you plan on moving on is an OK thing right? I feel kind of bad given my current circumstances, my direct boss and coworkers are all super cool and they're being very accommodating with personal issues I'm going through right now, but when asked if I plan on staying I deflected and dodged the question. I'm not going to tell them as I'm pretty sure the risks always outweigh the reward, but for some reason this time I kind feel like a jerk if I don't  Also because I'd like to move overseas but don't think I could without jeopardizing my current job in the mean time (government bullshit, if have to tell them). Mr. Crow fucked around with this message at 16:42 on Mar 15, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2015 16:39
|
|
|
Flashing Twelve posted:I've also hit the point where I've mastered any skills I could pick up from there (there's tons more to learn, but I could do that at another organisation). If you truly feel this way, it is indeed time to move on. While your concerns of appearing to be a job hopper are something to consider, and the fact you COULD end up some place worse, in my opinion it is most important to feel like you are progressing. If learning things is important to you, you will being to hate yourself and everyone around you if you stay where you cannot learn or do anything new or interesting. That they are willing to push for a 30% raise when promotions are frozen is a really good indicator of your worth to them, and a good signal that you could be doing much better elsewhere, so you should feel confident. I recently moved to a new job where yes, I did get more money, but the most important factor for me was the opportunities to learn new things and progress. At my previous job, I was barely doing any real development work (as a Senior Developer), and even the perk of working from home 80% of the time did nothing to improve how that made me feel about the job. Get your resume up to date, update linkedin and start applying for things that sound interesting to you. You HAVE a job now, that you do not hate, so you can take your time, but your time there is probably coming to a close. Best to accept it and move forward confidently. Mr. Crow posted:There is literally never a situation where telling your boss/employer you plan on moving on is an OK thing right? Well, it's always a personal judgement call, but unless you are 100% sure they are going to actively support you in finding another role, don't do it. There is little real benefit and much risk. Don't feel bad about it, it really is the same for everyone. Do you expect your boss to tell you when he is looking to leave? No? Then why should you tell him? Skandranon fucked around with this message at 16:48 on Mar 15, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2015 16:44
|
|
|
Skandranon posted:Do you expect your boss to tell you when he is looking to leave? No? Then why should you tell him? It really depends on the situation and your relationship with your manager.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2015 19:25
|
|
|
Or you could just stop taking all those illegal drugs 
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2015 19:35
|
|
|
Tunga posted:This is really not equivalent though, since your boss doesn't have to ask you if he can take time off for interviews. I meant this in terms of how bad he should feel if he chooses not to tell his boss that he is looking for another job. If he is unable to trust his boss 100% with this knowledge, he shouldn't tell, and should not feel bad about it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2015 19:39
|
|
|
Mr. Crow posted:There is literally never a situation where telling your boss/employer you plan on moving on is an OK thing right? Let me stop you right there. To answer your initial question, generally it's not the smartest thing to do, no, though I'd avoid putting it in such absolute terms. Beyond that, this is just business. The people you are working with and for are not your friends (I mean, unless you started a business with your friends or something), they are your co-workers, your colleagues. Professional courtesy does not, in my opinion, extend to putting yourself at risk of losing your income when you did not expect to. Another way to look at it is that a business can usually weather the sudden loss of an employee much more easily than a worker can weather the loss of a job. You can be nice about your exit. You can do your best to avoid quitting at the height of crunch time a week before a major release. If you are some kind of linchpin at your job and you leaving will throw things into chaos (very unlikely), and/or you really respect some of the people you work with/for, feel free to give more than two weeks' notice, and offer to take an active role in the transition (help write up the job requirements for your replacement, do some extra documentation on the stuff you've been working on, help interview, etc.). I post on these forums regularly about an old job that I hated because of an rear end in a top hat boss (pretty much any story I tell about a terrible boss is this one job), to the point where I was losing sleep and my personality was changing for the worse. When I quit, I still gave three weeks' notice instead of two, because I respected the people I was working with and didn't want to leave them high and dry. The co-workers really appreciated it (that and the couple hours of phone help I gave them after I was gone, clarifying a couple things about the tech that they just weren't as familiar with as I had been), and coincidentally, the boss decided to act like a jilted lover and not say a single word to me during those last three weeks, so that extra time wasn't a burden at all. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2015 00:11
|
|
|
So random legal-ish question here. I recently switched jobs to a place with way better culture and a decent $10k raise. At my former job I got relocation assistance when moving from out of state. It was $5k and it was "vested" (prob not the proper term here) over 2-years, meaning if I left early I'd have to pay some back. I left after 9 months, so I still owed a good chunk of the relocation. Here's the rub, the main HR lady at my former company was the single most incompetent person I've ever dealt with in a professional context, she messed up literally every bit of paperwork she had to do for me, messed up the entire company's W2's, and when I left was messing up a new employee's work visa. When I left I wasn't contacted by her in regards to paying back the relocation, and I highly doubt she'll contact me at all about it. Just for my own state of mind, is there any set amount of time where I know for sure that I don't have to pay it back? I've been holding the cash in my account and using my CC a lot in the mean time in case they reach out to me, but I'd prefer not to do that for any extended period of time. I also know that oftentimes companies won't bother to pursue, since it's such an insignificant amount of money to them in the long run.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2015 04:07
|
|
|
trip9 posted:So random legal-ish question here. I recently switched jobs to a place with way better culture and a decent $10k raise. At my former job I got relocation assistance when moving from out of state. It was $5k and it was "vested" (prob not the proper term here) over 2-years, meaning if I left early I'd have to pay some back. I left after 9 months, so I still owed a good chunk of the relocation. Here's the rub, the main HR lady at my former company was the single most incompetent person I've ever dealt with in a professional context, she messed up literally every bit of paperwork she had to do for me, messed up the entire company's W2's, and when I left was messing up a new employee's work visa. When I left I wasn't contacted by her in regards to paying back the relocation, and I highly doubt she'll contact me at all about it. Just for my own state of mind, is there any set amount of time where I know for sure that I don't have to pay it back? I've been holding the cash in my account and using my CC a lot in the mean time in case they reach out to me, but I'd prefer not to do that for any extended period of time. Is there anything in writing? Easy solution: Have more than $3000 in savings.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2015 04:12
|
|
|
Bhodi posted:Or I could just take a drug test and then their money because I like the pay / commute / benefits / incidentals / people I interviewed with / some other reason that is comparable with "going without" for a month or hey maybe just don't do drugs at all if you want a white collar job. This is such an incredibly bizarre sentiment to me. Here in California I don't know a single person whose white collar job tested them for drug usage. I know a handful who were tested at past retail/food service jobs, but that wasn't even most of them. Maybe if you're in the goddamn US Marines or something you should expect to hand over a cup of your stinky fresh urine to Human Resources every so often, but to me it seems like an outlandish and humiliating request to ask of someone. What business is it of my employer's what I do in my free time if it doesn't have a negative impact on my production at work?
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2015 04:28
|
|
|
Ithaqua posted:Is there anything in writing? This is the only part that was in writing "You are eligible for a one-time bonus of $5,000, for relocation assistance to cover any costs incurred for you to relocate to New York. This is bonus is taxable, it will be reflected in your wages and considered a debt to the company that will be relieved at a rate of 1/24 per month of employment". Yeah I get keeping $3k in savings but I'd like to pay off my CC as soon as possible, and was just kind of curious.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2015 04:57
|
|
|
Deus Rex posted:This is such an incredibly bizarre sentiment to me. Here in California I don't know a single person whose white collar job tested them for drug usage. I know a handful who were tested at past retail/food service jobs, but that wasn't even most of them.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2015 05:07
|
|
|
Bhodi posted:I think it's an east coast / west coast thing, "committed to a drug-free workplace" and all that. I've only been tested on-hire though, albeit in several places at this point. Eh, there are plenty of companies on the west coast that take a hard line against drugs. My old employer was one, to the point where even if you had a legitimate medical exception (medical MJ was legal here at the time), they would fire you if you failed a drug test, full stop. They did pre-employment and random screenings. Though to be fair to them, a large part of this place was open to the public, not just an office environment, so they had an image to maintain. California is kind of an outlier, from what I understand.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2015 07:02
|
|
|
Che Delilas posted:Eh, there are plenty of companies on the west coast that take a hard line against drugs. My old employer was one, to the point where even if you had a legitimate medical exception (medical MJ was legal here at the time), they would fire you if you failed a drug test, full stop. They did pre-employment and random screenings. Though to be fair to them, a large part of this place was open to the public, not just an office environment, so they had an image to maintain. I would imagine that drug-testing is also largely related to whether the company does business (directly or indirectly) with government institutions and/or the military.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2015 07:08
|
|
|
Nah, they'll ask you about drug use as part of getting a clearance but actual tests are not necessarily required.
Fellatio del Toro fucked around with this message at 07:15 on Mar 16, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2015 07:12
|
|
|
Che Delilas posted:Eh, there are plenty of companies on the west coast that take a hard line against drugs. My old employer was one, to the point where even if you had a legitimate medical exception (medical MJ was legal here at the time), they would fire you if you failed a drug test, full stop. They did pre-employment and random screenings. Though to be fair to them, a large part of this place was open to the public, not just an office environment, so they had an image to maintain. That sounds insane to me. Beyond compensation, feeling trusted and valued is the most important thing to me in a job and being forced to take a drug test is a really easy way for a company to make me feel like it doesn't trust me. Also what Deus Rex said: Deus Rex posted:What business is it of my employer's what I do in my free time if it doesn't have a negative impact on my production at work? For reference, east coast here.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2015 11:58
|
|
|
Blinkz0rz posted:That sounds insane to me. I agree with the sentiment that it's none of their business as long as it doesn't affect your job. But it's easier for a company to just say "you took drugs, you're fired" than it is for them to actively evaluate your performance and decide that you haven't been getting poo poo done and been more distracted and less productive. And as a bonus it scores points with aging, conservative executives. It's pretty clear to me that a lot of executives and managers don't give a flying gently caress about making their employees feel trusted and valued, so these kinds of policies really don't have any downside for those people.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2015 13:36
|
|
|
Deus Rex posted:This is such an incredibly bizarre sentiment to me. Here in California I don't know a single person whose white collar job tested them for drug usage. I know a handful who were tested at past retail/food service jobs, but that wasn't even most of them. In the goddamn US Marines you don't hand over a cup of stinky fresh urine. They have to watch "urine leaving the body" in vivo. So that's fun. It's a random thing that happens a couple times a year to keep things interesting/awful. Though in all fairness, someone almost always fails so I guess you could argue they're necessary.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2015 14:04
|
|
|
I'm almost done with my cs degree (masters, ba is not cs) and I got invited to join phi kappa phi, is this worth anything at all? I think I have to pay a one time fee to join.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2015 14:38
|
|
|
Doghouse posted:I'm almost done with my cs degree (masters, ba is not cs) and I got invited to join phi kappa phi, is this worth anything at all? I think I have to pay a one time fee to join. No it's not.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2015 18:20
|
|
|
Doghouse posted:I'm almost done with my cs degree (masters, ba is not cs) and I got invited to join phi kappa phi, is this worth anything at all? I think I have to pay a one time fee to join. I had to google this to figure out what it was. Thats probably a good sign its worthless.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2015 21:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 02:16 |
|
|
shodanjr_gr posted:What's your background? Bay Area interns often make more than 2x what you're being offered on top of ridiculous perks. I didn't get a 2x pay increase, but I got a decent bump. I'm really glad I went through with it too, because my initial reaction was to be happy that I'm employed and accept the offer as is. Instead, I got a decent pay increase for an hour spent on a carefully crafted counter offer. Negotiating is surprisingly fun, too. Thanks for the help everyone!
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2015 23:58
|
|
