Jump to content

Legalized Marijuana and Aviation Topic by Hoot


Guest
 Share

Recommended Posts

HOOT    1

  • 1
  •  
  • HOOT
  • Donating Member
  • 1
  • 21 posts
  • Gender:Male
4
  •  
  • Trader
  • Donating Member
  • 63
  • 814 posts

I'm not a smoker (of any kind) but it will be interesting to see if this holds. I can't see how it is legal for a company to ban something that you do on your own time - provided you are not under the influence when you show up for work (or the legal definition of influence).

SUppose someone could say it is their religious right

conehead    301

  • 7
  •  
  • conehead
  • Donating Member
  • 301
  • 4,470 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Barrie, ont.

Interesting... that’s even more strict than the new RCAF cannabis usage policy.

HOOT    1

  • 1
  •  
  • HOOT
  • Donating Member
  • 1
  • 21 posts
  • Gender:Male

“Air Canada is allowed to make those decisions,” Transport Minsiter Marc Garneau said Friday. “They could be challenged, but they’re allowed to make them.

“From our point of view, from a safety point of view, we already have measures in place to ensure that the crew of an airplane — and I’m not just talking about the pilots; also the flight attendants — are fit to fly.”

Not to worry, Marc and the boy's have it covered?

J.O.    897

  • 7
  •  
  • J.O.
  • Donating Member
  • 897
  • 6,333 posts
  • Gender:Male

My understanding is the RCAF policy is very prescriptive (28 days) for two work groups - pilots and submariners. They haven’t stated it publicly but I’m left wondering if there’s some science behind it relating to the delayed release of THC from the cells back into the bloodstream under certain physiological situations such as changing air pressure or elevated stress. 

In any case, I can’t blame AC for taking this approach. TC seems incapable of providing any level of rules (or even guidance) in advance of the legalization so why not go for broke and let the legal beagles hash it out should someone decide to challenge it. I gotta say, I wouldn’t want to be a big wig in the pilot’s or mechanics unions taking on that challenge. Imagine the headlines. 

 DEFCON    923 

  • 7
  •  
  • DEFCON
  • Donating Member
  • 923
  • 8,023 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ontario

And then comes the company demand for mandatory & random testing.

Then again, if the employer is prepared to pay a whole lot more to employees in safety sensitive positions in return for their acceptance of this new invasion of privacy, then I think it might be okay?

It's funny that Air Canada hasn't acted anywhere near as quickly when it comes to flight duty regs? 

 Vsplat    354 

  • 5
  •  
  • Vsplat
  • Donating Member
  • 354
  • 1,458 posts

Flight and duty regs cost money because you need more pilots.  If AC could ban alcohol and tobacco, they'd do that too because doing so would save them money. Same with this.

There won't be a need for random drug testing.  There will be testing if there is ever a mishap.  I am not an insider, but my sense is that any crew member who tests positive after an incident will have zero indemnification from the company.  There won't be any grey. 

Just my opinion.

Vs

 

7
  •  
  • conehead
  • Donating Member
  • 301
  • 4,470 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Barrie, ont.
On 9/28/2018 at 7:50 PM, J.O. said:

My understanding is the RCAF policy is very prescriptive (28 days) for two work groups - pilots and submariners. 

Yup, 28 days prohibition for aircrew, 24 hours for Maintenance personnel. Here’s the order:

https://mobile.caf-fac.ca/canforgens/page.php?path=data/2018/151-18_e.asp

    

  • 7
  •  
  • J.O.
  • Donating Member
  • 897
  • 6,333 posts
  • Gender:Male

The Supreme Court has already ruled that random drug testing by employers is unconstitutional. Testing must be supported by a reasonable suspicion or when an event such as an accident occurs. 

Kip Powick    1,127

  • 7
  •  
  • Kip Powick
  • Donating Member
  • 1,127
  • 10,363 posts
On 9/28/2018 at 9:40 PM, conehead said:

Yup, 28 days prohibition for aircrew, 24 hours for Maintenance personnel. Here’s the order:

https://mobile.caf-fac.ca/canforgens/page.php?path=data/2018/151-18_e.asp

Basically that would mean a pilot on  any Squadron, could never do the drug. Seldom does any "active" pilot get more than 28 days off in a row. DND  has stopped the movement of pilots about every three years and more and more pilots are just going from Squadron to Squadron and could have 8-10 years of constant flying.

If I was still in I would not have a problem with that because I have never ingested recreational drugs but I did leave a Loadmaster in Lahr when he turned up reeking of "Mary-Jane".

To me, the most interesting thing about legalizing MJ is what is going to happen when the first "pot head" drives 'fully loaded' and kills someone ???

I may be in the minority but I don't think legalizing the drug was the answer.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Kip Powick said:

 

MARSHALL...

What happened to the format of this thread  ??????????????????????

 

 

Problem was all the folks who ran it off topic so it was needed to bring it back but still retain their input. See therefore the topic in Non Aviation.  Of course I could have taken the path used by moderators on other forums and simply removed the "Non Aviation" inputs.  Perhaps that would be best in the future... ?  It would certainly be a lot easier for me to do that than spending time to do retain their posts on a cold Sunday ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My question referred to the physical layout of the thread.  Author names and their other data were above each reply, not beside the reply ........ as they are now.

Must have been a tech hic-cup ???

I understand your comment with respect to keeping aviation in this forum and non aviation comments in the non-aviation forum...and agree

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not a hiccup but rather a cut and paste limitation (cut and paste was the only way I could bring back the comments), you will note that the original comments are in the Nonaviation topic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Garneau has made another rpolicy decision.....CBD will be allowed to be carried by passengers on domestic flights within Canada.....which will be interesting if said flight is domestic, but holds a US alternate and has to divert. 

What would be the chances??? Nah, never happen ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, st27 said:

Garneau has made another rpolicy decision.....CBD will be allowed to be carried by passengers on domestic flights within Canada.....which will be interesting if said flight is domestic, but holds a US alternate and has to divert. 

What would be the chances??? Nah, never happen ?

I guess it would be a case of flyer beware! :Dancing-Chilli:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The two chemicals (active ingredients if ou will) are THC with all its deleterious effects and CBD Which actually balances out the THC effects.  Much of the street MJ contains high levels of THC and low Levels of CBD which make it more "potent"

The CBD alone has been found to have some very beneficial effects on the human body.

But yes the average border guard wont have a clue.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share



×
×
  • Create New...