• The Dark Side 💕 Welcome Guest 💕
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Notable Threads Urgent Hotlines
    Bereavement Mindfulness
    Suicide Support Anger Management
  • TDS Moderators: AlphaMethylPhenyl | paranoid android

suspended from my new job because i am on MMT

^yea i understand where they are coming from. Not too long ago i was the operations manager of a 3500 member health club and i had to hire and fire associates as well as manage a staff of service desk, personal trainers and others, about 17 people. i attended more HR and EEOC meetings than i can remember, so yea i understand. that isnt the issue. the issue is they think i am impaired by the methadone and it would make my work suffer, which isnt the case.
 
Not to keep butting in here, but I don't think the onus should be on the OP to prove why he is on a prescription medication for a recognized medical condition. If he is screened out at this point (after he's hired) for being on methadone, he shouldn't have to beg and plead for a job, he should seek legal action. This is a valid human rights issue.


I'm also not convinced about the pot. There's a chance that they claimed to find weed on the lab report, to demonstrate illegal drug use, to cover their asses.

I really, truly believe that there should be laws in place to prevent companies for screening for methadone. If private labs are getting these contracts, it should be relegated to the public sector for maximum oversight.

I believe companies can and should use every legal means of discrimination available to pick the best possible candidate. Although, I disagree with both criminal background checks, and drug testing on principle alone. That aside, they cannot use illegal means of discrimination, nor can they be trusted to simply 'strike from the record' knowledge that they should not have.
 
Last edited:
I wouldn't want to work for such assholes. Is it just human resources that knows? If that was the case I would fight it, you definitely don't deserve to be treated like a criminal when your life has been improved and you have a medical condition.
 
the other option involves knowing if the methadone flags specifically for methadone or for opiates in general.

if the UA is going to just test positive for opiates, just tell 'em you took some vicoden for a low back injury a couple weeks before the ua. believe me, background checks are typically fairly low level for non executive positions. if you have a plausible reason for something common showing up in your system, no one's going to call you on it.

its still such a buyers market for employers that its not worth taking chances with candidates.

the fact is, the best option for developing a prosperous career is not to take drugs.
 
^ That is why noone tells the truth when they apply for a job. Sadly even if you are on methadone for addiction and the addiction is in remission most companies still won't hire you being the cunts that they are :p

So in my mind it's a clear cut human rights issues here since it is a disease. If they broke any laws with this make them pay for it and hit them where it hurts which is in the pocket.
 
For the sake of argument, let's say you were not on MMT and somehow on the application you answered a question replying that you had been a heroin addict in the last few years. Would you expect that to help or hurt your chances of being hired? Cmon people... be realistic here... there are not alot of heroin addicts who are responsible and can be depended upon to hold a steady job. If it was in your distant past, perhaps a potential employer might not hold it against you. But if it was your recent past... and you still had a dependence on opiates... and you still have to take opiates to function.... you have got to expect an employer to be apprehensive about you. It's not an issue of having a medical condition and being on medication. It's an issue of the nature of heroin addiction. I sympathize with the OP, but we need to accept how the world really is and now how we wish it was. Employers will not want to hire drug addicts. And we don't have a human right to be a drug addicted employee.
 
It's not an issue of being unrealistic at all. Of course employers will want to mitigate their risk when hiring off the street. Who wouldn't? Hell, if I were an employer, I'd want to know if my employees had STD's, what they did on the weekend, their credit history, whether they smoke cigarettes, religious bent, if they're into threesomes. I'd want to know all sorts of sordid details, because it would be pretty awesome to base my decisions on a list of preconceived notions I have about people.

But it's important we have safeguards in place to prevent certain knowledge from colouring a potential employer's opinion.

Because the realistic reality is, people do have the right not to be discriminated against for being drug addicted employees, when that drug happens to be methadone.
 
^ Actually since addiction is considered a disease it would be a human rights issue. If they use the "you have a disease" thing for everything else that whatever addiction you have affects then how is employment any different? I mean you wouldnt fire someone for having say cancer, diabetes or a mental disorder such as major depression or schizophrenia now would you? Actually it happens all the time thanks to those lovely employers who side step the labour laws thanks to the help of people who are complaceat in it. But this does not make it right now does it?

Unless he was nodding out on the job then why should he be suspended? If you do your work as good as someone who has not so much as a aspirin in them then why should you be punished? The one thing i real;ly hate about western Canada and the US is that they seem to drug test for every fucking job. I see no reason why someone working at walmart, burger king or in a fucking bookstore should be drug tested! that is just plain old bullshit :! . Fucking management uses any excuse to root out any potential "problem" employees. Such as those that have the balls to stick up for their rights :\
 
The problem is as simple as any other form of discrimination to me..people are going to discrimiate against race / sexual orientation ... even gender on housing forms... should they be able to get away with it ?? Nope... do they ?? Yep... it's reality, and reality of it is these people in the job field can just as easily say we didn't hire him or her because of reason A, not reason B which was being on MMT...sucks but it's true, we need to be safeguards of our own well being.
 
I don't believe that it illegal for an employer to discriminate against an employee or potential employee for being a drug addict. Hell... I just saw a news report about a hospital that will not hire anybody who smokes cigarettes. They feel that it does not represent their best interests.
 
So if I have to take 4mg of Xanax a day to manage my anxiety, how am I any more or less of a drug addict? Help me understand why it's OK to discriminate here.

I mean, if you show up looking whacked at your interview, then that's one thing, but the OP got the job. He must have been on methadone and functioning well enough to land the position. I'm failing to see a compelling argument to allow employers access to information regarding prescription medication, beyond what is evident during the interview process.

And because I actually looked into it, I'll share with you my understanding how this works where I live. If methadone is included in panel, the lab will call the prospective employee directly and ask whether it's prescribed. If employee confirms, that result will be omitted from the report when sent back to the employer. Makes sense to me.

So the question I would be asking at this point, is why the lab is forwarding damning information to the employer, before contacting the employee first?
 
Last edited:
I'm not sure. I asked on another board local to Canada, and the response I got was pertinent to Ontario. I'm not sure about the other provinces, but I assume it's the same. Keeping in mind of course, that the practice of drug screening employees is rare to begin with.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top