Legalized pot? Not for federal employees.

[mahatmakanejeeves]

No taxation without representation, or something like that.

Legalized pot? Not for federal employees.

Federal Eye
By Lisa Rein May 27 at 11:36 AM
@Reinlwapo

If you live in the District or one of the 23 states that have legalized marijuana, think twice before lighting a joint if you work for the federal government: ... Pot is still illegal for you.

New guidance from the Office of Personnel Management on Wednesday is unambiguous and stern. Federal workforce rules remain unchanged for the roughly 4 million federal employees and military personnel across the U.S. The feds still consider marijuana an illegal drug, and possessing or using it is a crime.

“Heads of agencies are expected to advise their workforce that legislative changes by some states and the District of Columbia do not alter federal law, existing suitability criteria or Executive Branch policies regarding marijuana,” OPM Director Katherine Archuleta wrote in a memo posted on the agency Web site.
....

Read OPM’s guidance on marijuana use for federal employees

In other words, the 1986 executive order from President Ronald Reagan requiring the federal workplace and workforce to be drug-free remains in place.

And in other news, federal employees are reminded to turn in their laptops by COB, at which time they will be issued desktop computers with 386 processors and a maximum hard drive capacity of 20 MB.

[MADem]

1. When it's NATIONALLY legalized, that will change.

While people don't like this, because hey, it's weed, and it's dumb to make a plant illegal, that whole federal-state thing is a two-edged sword. People LIKE the federal government when they're providing equality marriage benefits in mouth-breathing states....they're just a bit behind the curve on this particular issue.

I can guarantee that if we get a Republican in the WH, we can kiss that federal legalization goodbye, over the near term (while the federal government cynically collects the tax profits on it from the states).

[yeoman6987]

2. I can see military but civilian federal workers should depend on job

I am sure once all this is more common, civilian jobs will dictate the rules. We're still very much at the beginning of all of this.

[fredamae]

3. Instead of using Consumption of Any

substance as cause to deny/arrest/prosecute etc.
Why not use Impairment testing instead?

I know a few folks that can down a six-pack before noon and never skip a beat. If I even Look at a glass of beer, I'm screwed up.
Others can manage pain meds etc..no problem. I take an xtra strength Tylenol and I unwillingly fall asleep.
So, If I took a Tylenol at work or while driving....I could hurt myself or others because that crap impairs me...yet the person, next to me who is legally taking narcotic pain relievers is unphased.

So, doesn't it make more sense to use Impairment Testing instead of UA's?

A bit off topic..but they, I assume, will be testing Fed Workers for cannabis.

[djean111]

4. Our new Attorney General, Lynch, was quite clear about how she does not approve of

legalizing marijuana. And - if you are waiting to see if she prosecutes anyone from Wall Street - don't hold your breath.
FIFA will be a big dog and pony show, but no one will mention that those pointless "90 days to prosecute Wall Street" or whatever it was, have expired, with, er, no prosecutions. Don't even ask about civil forfeiture.