If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Seattle Times)   Hate on marijuana all you want, but thanks to Washington legalizing it, 40 staffers and one pot expert now have a job   (blogs.seattletimes.com) divider line 108
    More: Cool, Liquor Control Board, marijuana legalization, Seattle Times, marijuana  
•       •       •

4938 clicks; posted to Main » on 01 Dec 2012 at 9:27 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



108 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-12-01 07:07:31 PM  

casual disregard: Employers in a "right to work" state can fire you for any damn reason.


Only if you're an "at will" employee. Right-to-work and at-will are not the same thing at all.
 
2012-12-01 07:10:36 PM  

DaCaptain19: RobSeace: HotIgneous Intruder: Employers can't fire you for testing positive for a legal drug, right?

Of course they can... A while back, some places were making news for firing anyone who smoked cigarettes... If some place wanted to hire only non-drinkers, they could fire anyone who drank alcohol...

You know, I have half a mind - if I were ever interviewed for a new job and was asked to take a drug test - to say "Sure I will, only if everyone on my prospective "team", my direct supervisor, and everyone in the company with a higher position than I also take the test."

The company doesn't want a "drugged out" worker - why should I want to work in a company potentially rife with illegal drug users? Or alcoholics for that matter?


I worked for a dealership once that was all "random drug test" bat shiat crazy. They'd pull a couple people in for testing every month or so. So this one day the owner gets pulled over right in front of the show room. Next thing we see is extra cop cars and a dog sniffing around. Yes indeed, bunch of coke in the trunk. After that the drug testing requests were laughed at.
 
2012-12-01 07:23:41 PM  

Giblet: You must have missed the news. That was tested back in the 1800's and it turns out that you will do what the United States government tells you to do. Strike the 4th, the 10th, and the 1st is limited to designated zones.


Well government knows what is best and that whole consitution thing is (so I have seen posted by various farkers):

(1) an outdate piece of paper

(2) Written by a bunch of old white men who owned slaves.

(3) A "living document" which they define as government can reinterpret it to mean what they need it to at the time

(4) The general werlfare clause means government can do whatever it wants for our own good as they define it..

To think otherwise means you don't like roads or schools and would prefer to live in Somalia.
 
2012-12-02 03:34:13 AM  
If it was truly legal it would cost almost nothing. Know that.
 
2012-12-02 11:56:08 AM  

albertalaska: If it was truly legal it would cost almost nothing. Know that.


but the cost of lawsuits would be enormous.
instead of just physical damage
your talking mental damage
in billions of dollars
much more than tobacco
 
2012-12-02 04:44:50 PM  

Nothing To See Here: Here is a picture of Seattle the day Pot was legalized in the State.

[farm5.static.flickr.com image 500x319]


Naw, that was just Thursday. Or Sunday, I forget. What were we talking about again?
 
2012-12-03 02:34:47 PM  

albertalaska: If it was truly legal it would cost almost nothing. Know that.


You are dead wrong. Know that.
 
2012-12-04 01:07:51 AM  

albertalaska: If it was truly legal it would cost almost nothing. Know that.


So everything in the grocery store is free of charge.

Who knew?
 
Displayed 8 of 108 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report