Underhill tweet: David Onyemata arrested for possession of marijuana (2/7/2019) (2 Viewers)

just saying, I moved out to California and was involved in a car accident that messed up my back and neck. Recently I've been using cannibus cbd oil which activates when combined with THC and have been feeling the best I've been in a long time which I do not take for granted. After almost a year and a half of using prescription strength Ibuprofen and other prescription pain killers, I ended up with bleeding stomach ulcer on New Year's Day at 1 am in the morning. Not a cool experience at all and takes strong discipline and time to recover from. The cbd oil that I am taking now doesn't have side affects that affect me negatively. Cbd can be taken individually but doesn't have the same effects without the combination of THC. By the way, the package contained oils and edibles, etc. I can totally understand why a player that puts there body through such a physical contact would attempt to heal using plants instead of pharmaceuticals. NFL and legal policies are beyond outdated. Legalize and decriminalize it immediately
 
At age 70, I'm happily retired living in a state that allows recreational marijuana with absolutely no fear of employer retaliation and/or criminal action. It is quite refreshing and empowering.

Smoke a bowl and enjoy life. It doesn't last forever.
 
At age 70, I'm happily retired living in a state that allows recreational marijuana with absolutely no fear of employer retaliation and/or criminal action. It is quite refreshing and empowering.

Smoke a bowl and enjoy life. It doesn't last forever.

No mstter where you live and what the laws are, you will not be allowed to test positive for marijuana, while working for an O&G company. So enjoy your retirement and weed.
 
But he wasn't arrest. He got a citation.

I think it’s basically the same thing for disciplinary purposes. He was technically arrested and then released on promise to appear (summons).

One game seems about right under the circumstances.
 
No mstter where you live and what the laws are, you will not be allowed to test positive for marijuana, while working for an O&G company. So enjoy your retirement and weed.

You're telling me if you test positive while you work in Weld county just outside Denver, you'll be fired? Really?
 
No mstter where you live and what the laws are, you will not be allowed to test positive for marijuana, while working for an O&G company. So enjoy your retirement and weed.
This is true. I live in Colorado and work security for a Casino. I get randomly drug tested (often) which includes MJ. Any company can, and they often do, have stronger/different requirements than the state. If you don't like those rules, you're always welcome to work elsewhere.

So I seriously doubt that any state where MJ is legal can say there is no recrimination for recreational use by all employers.
You're telling me if you test positive while you work in Weld county just outside Denver, you'll be fired? Really?
Yep, depending on the job and their individual requirements. Unless you're part of a union, most jobs are "fire at will".

You can't smoke dope and play in the NFL, no matter where you live. The requirements for drug testing for a Bronco is the same as for a Saint and so are the punishments. True also for non-union staff and support personnel.
 
Last edited:
This is true. I live in Colorado and work security for a Casino. I get randomly drug tested (often) which includes MJ. Any company can, and they often do, have stronger/different requirements than the state. If you don't like those rules, you're always welcome to work elsewhere.

So I seriously doubt that any state where MJ is legal can say there is no recrimination for recreational use by all employers.

Yep, depending on the job and their individual requirements. Unless you're part of a union, most jobs are "fire at will".

You can't smoke dope and play in the NFL, no matter where you live. The requirements for drug testing for a Bronco is the same as for a Saint and so are the punishments. True also for non-union staff and support personnel.
Unions mostly don’t say anything about an employee failing a drug test. At least my union won’t.
 
I guess you missed what just happened in Nevada.

That was for hiring practices only. It does not preclude testing "while" employed which was Super44's point. And Nevada's AB 132 is the only one of its kind in the country.

Text of law:

Except as otherwise specifically provided by law:

1. It is unlawful for any employer in this State to fail or refuse to hire a prospective employee because the prospective employee submitted to a screening test and the results of the screening test indicate the presence of marijuana.

2. The provisions of subsection 1 do not apply if the prospective employee is applying for a position: (a) As a firefighter, as defined in NRS 450B.071; (b) As an emergency medical technician, as defined in NRS 450B.065; (c) That requires an employee to operate a motor vehicle and for which federal or state law requires the employee to submit to screening tests; or (d) That, in the determination of the employer, could adversely affect the safety of others.

3. If an employer requires an employee to submit to a screening test within the first 30 days of employment, the employee shall have the right to submit to an additional screening test, at his or her own expense, to rebut the results of the initial screening test. The employer shall accept and give appropriate consideration to the results of such a screening test.

4. The provisions of this section do not apply: (a) To the extent that they are inconsistent or otherwise in conflict with the provisions of an employment contract or collective bargaining agreement. (b) To the extent that they are inconsistent or otherwise in conflict with the provisions of federal law. (c) To a position of employment funded by a federal grant.

5. As used in this section, “screening test” means a test of a person’s blood, urine, hair or saliva to detect the general presence of a controlled substance or any other drug.

Secs. 3 and 3.5. (Deleted by amendment.) Sec. 4. This act becomes effective on January 1, 2020.

Also note the exemption in 4. (a) specifically.
 
Last edited:
Unions mostly don’t say anything about an employee failing a drug test. At least my union won’t.
Mostly, but there has been some movement in some unions in MJ legal states to push for impairment testing only much like alcohol.
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Users who are viewing this thread

    Back
    Top Bottom