Less than a week after the New York Times created shockwaves by , critics are asking why the company still discriminates against responsible weed users among its own staff.
The New York Times analyzes the urine of its staff for marijuana byproducts, which can stay in one’s body for . Pot’s effects wear off in three to six hours. Workplace urinalysis is discriminatory, critics note. Cocaine, methamphetamine,US Congress computers banned from Wikipedia after, and heroin users as well as problem drinkers can pass the same urinalysis in as little as a day after their last buzz.
If the New York Times believes it is wrong to discriminate against people for using marijuana,Every NFL Team's Most Positiv, then they should stop doing so. Full stop.,” states Tom Angell, Chairman, , a nonprofit dedicated to educating voters that a majority of Americans support legalization.
Marijuana Majority has teamed up with WeedMaps.com the leading pot shop locator site to pressure the Grey Lady. They’ve started a this week to Arthur O. Sulzberger, Jr., publisher and chairman of the New York Times, as well as Mark Thompson,Lafayette- Family displaced i, President CEO. The petition states:
“No one is saying that employers should be forced to deal with workers who are intoxicated at the office, but off-duty marijuana use doesn t negatively impact a journalist s ability to do his or her job. Traditional drug testing programs cannot determine whether someone is currently high; they merely test for metabolites that indicate whether someone used marijuana as far back as a month ago. 


The Times should replace its outdated drug testing policy with a modern approach that focuses on impairment in the workplace, prioritizing job performance over the content of employees’ urine. What journalists and other employees do on their own time is their own business. The Times doesn’t concern itself with whether their writers have a drink after work. They should institute the same policy for marijuana.”
The Times’ own editorial page editor Andy Rosenthal seemed to this week: Whether we re going to continue testing for marijuana or not, I don t know, Rosenthal said. If they ask me, I ll say stop.”’
Focus on job performance and not on the content of employees urine, Angell states.
Weed tech company strategist Aaron Houston said ending prohibition requires more than repealing draconian drugs laws. Citizens are subject to layer upon layer of prohibitionist policies in their own homes, workplaces, universities, and beyond. These polices have accreted over decades and contributed to in Drug War outcomes.
For example, many their coders, who pull down six-figure salaries. But you can lose your job at Mcdonald s for a joint smoked last weekend.
The Times’ current drug testing policy conundrum highlights the challenge facing our society as states legalize marijuana, Houston states. People may no longer go to jail for marijuana under the new laws, but they still face an array of other life-changing consequences for using marijuana that they wouldn’t face for using alcohol or prescription drugs, including loss of a job, voting rights, housing, and access to education, to name a few. The Times should change its drug testing policy to reflect its position ending marijuana prohibition.”