Dot Tests And Regulations

Unfortunately I have to agree with his other point. This is going to probably keep you out of the industry. You made a huge mistake by not giving yourself a minimum of six months clean without burning a joint before giving up a hair sample. That is going to make it next to impossible to move forward in a trucking career.

As someone who has had to completely change their medications due to quitting cannabis I would appreciate the “lighting up a joint” jokes to not be made. I am now on meds that do not work near as well for what I need them for, all to get “clean” to change my career. As someone who has found cannabis as the ONLY medicine that has been successful, I am rather sensitive on the subject. I do not joke about my cannabis use and would appreciate information without the jabs at my medicinal choices. And as we are in a country where nearly half our states have legal medical cannabis use, I would assume people would start to treat it as it is and not as it has been made out to be.

It wasn't a joke. In fact I seldom joke around in here. I am sorry if I offended you.

We try to help people make a good start at this. Unfortunately some of them come to us after they've got big problems. You happen to be in that group.

It doesn't matter how many states legalize marijuana. It is still something that is not allowed in this safety sensitive position. We deal with federal laws and state laws. Marijuana use is not ever going to be allowed for professional truck drivers.

the issue is on the Federal level. Your state might allow Cannabis use, but on the Federal level it's an issue and this is where the problem is,,,,

"DOT Office of Drug and Alcohol Policy and Compliance Notice

Recently, the Department of Justice (DOJ) issued guidelines for Federal prosecutors in states that have enacted laws authorizing the use of “medical marijuana.” http://www.justice.gov/opa/documents/medical-marijuana.pdf

We have had several inquiries about whether the DOJ advice to Federal prosecutors regarding pursuing criminal cases will have an impact upon the Department of Transportation’s longstanding regulation about the use of marijuana by safety‐sensitive transportation employees – pilots, school bus drivers, truck drivers, train engineers, subway operators, aircraft maintenance personnel, transit fire‐armed security personnel, ship captains, and pipeline emergency response personnel, among others.

We want to make it perfectly clear that the DOJ guidelines will have no bearing on the Department of Transportation’s regulated drug testing program. We will not change our regulated drug testing program based upon these guidelines to Federal prosecutors.

The Department of Transportation’s Drug and Alcohol Testing Regulation – 49 CFR Part 40, at 40.151(e) – does not authorize “medical marijuana” under a state law to be a valid medical explanation for a transportation employee’s positive drug test result.

That section states:

§ 40.151 What are MROs prohibited from doing as part of the verification process? As an MRO, you are prohibited from doing the following as part of the verification process: (e) You must not verify a test negative based on information that a physician recommended that the employee use a drug listed in Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act. (e.g., under a state law that purports to authorize such recommendations, such as the “medical marijuana” laws that some states have adopted.)

Therefore, Medical Review Officers will not verify a drug test as negative based upon information that a physician recommended that the employee use “medical marijuana.” Please note that marijuana remains a drug listed in Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act. It remains unacceptable for any safety‐sensitive employee subject to drug testing under the Department of Transportation’s drug testing regulations to use marijuana.

We want to assure the traveling public that our transportation system is the safest it can possibly be."

Unfortunately I have to agree with his other point. This is going to probably keep you out of the industry. You made a huge mistake by not giving yourself a minimum of six months clean without burning a joint before giving up a hair sample. That is going to make it next to impossible to move forward in a trucking career.

As someone who has had to completely change their medications due to quitting cannabis I would appreciate the “lighting up a joint” jokes to not be made. I am now on meds that do not work near as well for what I need them for, all to get “clean” to change my career. As someone who has found cannabis as the ONLY medicine that has been successful, I am rather sensitive on the subject. I do not joke about my cannabis use and would appreciate information without the jabs at my medicinal choices. And as we are in a country where nearly half our states have legal medical cannabis use, I would assume people would start to treat it as it is and not as it has been made out to be.

As someone who has had to completely change their medications due to quitting cannabis I would appreciate the “lighting up a joint” jokes to not be made. I am now on meds that do not work near as well for what I need them for, all to get “clean” to change my career. As someone who has found cannabis as the ONLY medicine that has been successful, I am rather sensitive on the subject. I do not joke about my cannabis use and would appreciate information without the jabs at my medicinal choices. And as we are in a country where nearly half our states have legal medical cannabis use, I would assume people would start to treat it as it is and not as it has been made out to be.

No one here has any issues with cannabis - and we are aware of the medicinal properties and the fact that it helps many people.

Rumor has it - the incoming administration is going to legalize it - but it WILL NEVER BE LEGAL for pilots, truck drivers, train engineers - PERIOD.

You can get all the sensitive you want - and I'm sorry whatever meds you're on don't work as well and create personal hardship for you.

Sparking a joint - eating an edible - doesn't matter to the industry WHY YOU USED - but - THAT YOU USED.

And if , in fact - the weed worked for your health issues - then maybe this was a blessing in disguise. No matter how bad you want to drive - do you want to be MISERABLE doing it - because your health is suffering?

There are lots of other meds that help people live productive lives - and many of those too - are NOT ACCEPTABLE IN A SAFETY SENSITIVE INDUSTRY.

Stuff like this is why a lot of people COME HERE FIRST and enquire as to what type of testing they can expect with certain companies. Had you done so in FORESIGHT (rather than hindsight) - we would have suggested AT LEAST 6 MONTHS SINCE LAST USE.

Sorry for your bad luck - and sorry if some seem "less than sympathetic" for your plight. In my 11+ years here, I've heard pretty much every story and excuse for a failed test - including LEGITIMATE MEDICINAL USE.

I've shared the facts with you - there's nothing really more I have to say on the topic.

Best of luck to you...

Rick

Interestingly - the bill I read will remove Cannabis SATIVA as a Sched I Narcotic (failed to mention good old skunky indica - my personal favorite).

But there will be new regs written for DOT to preclude its use in "safety sensitive positions".

Rick

You cannot tell the difference between a sari a and indica as both have the in them. The test is for the at large. I believe you are thinking of cbd which is non psychoactive. I have used that as well, stopped just in case it would trigger a positive. Hair follicle tests ARE NOT the most reliable testing. In fact it is proven that they have the most false positives of any other drug screening. Just to put out correct information.

I understand the federal cannabis laws, ridiculous as they are. I understand that DOT has laws, procedures, regulations, and companies must follow them. I am not here to tag on any trucking company , I would have named them, or tout myself as some holy grail of employee, I am just surprised. I didn’t lie to them when the test came back and I don’t plan to lie to any future prospects. I am here to find out what my options are. I am here to see if I was just screwed out of an entire job market because of one test that isn’t even reportable to the reporting entity. And as of now the best advice and info I have is from Rick, so thank you for that. I will check into that system and see what I can do. At least I have some path to continue on even if hope is slim.

So the data base does track failed results, and a SAP will be required Rick S.?

You cannot tell the difference between a sari a and indica as both have the in them. The test is for the at large. I believe you are thinking of cbd which is non psychoactive. I have used that as well, stopped just in case it would trigger a positive. Hair follicle tests ARE NOT the most reliable testing. In fact it is proven that they have the most false positives of any other drug screening. Just to put out correct information.

Oh - believe me - I know what I'm talking about. The bill I read, specified sativa - which is weird, because many of the strains out there are indica. My curiosity was, whether or not indica would be included in the removal from Sched I.

The test is for the metabolites left over in the body, after is processes the THC - it doesn't detect THC itself, just what remains after metabolization.

So the data base does track failed results, and a SAP will be required Rick S.?

As I mentioned previously - the FMCSA Clearinghouse tracks failed DOT screens - since hair is not a DOT approved method, it would NOT be on the clearinghouse, though her passed urines may well be.

I was referring to DAC Reports.

As far as the SAP goes - it would be the only way (even if the test wasn't a DOT) for the person to even be remotely considered. But as we all know - failing a pre-employment orientation screen is usually the kiss of death.

Even if the use was "medicinal" (or even prescribed) - because it is still on the Sched I list, as far as the Feds are concerned it is still illegal, and still NO FLY/NO EXCUSES on a DOT Screen (and obviously, on a pre-employment screen).

Regardless of medicinal or recreational use - it's too high a liability risk, for a company to have anything to do with someone who has a history of use. And it will likely NEVER BE OK'd by DOT.

Then again - there are now 56 genders (and counting), so WHO KNOWS WHAT THE FUTURE HOLDS.

I can picture climbing into an automated truck, sparking up a blunt and watching a movie while the truck drives...

Rick

So what I posted was accurate.