[indymike]

My company fixes recruiting process and software problems. Hats off to Amazon for this. I probably have the pot smoker conversation about once a month, usually with a 50-something or older executive that is running a factory short-staffed.

Pot is radioactive for many employers because insurance discounts and employment regulations are stuck in the "Refer Madness" era (Refer Madness was a propaganda film about the dangers of pot). So, employers face two surprises: increasing liability, workers comp and other insurance AND potentially, "hi we're from a government agency and under regulation XYZ 202 sub paragraph 293888 you need to drug test and immediately fire those that flunk or we will fine you. Have a happy day!"

[wolverine876]

> 50-something or older executive

Do you mean to imply or assume that 50-somethings are unfamiliar with marijuana? It was already common for Baby Boomers, who are older than that.

What happens is that open-minded, pot-smoking 20-somethings think 50-somethings are close-minded and ignorant. Then 30 years later many of those 20-somethings are the exact same as their predecessors. Instead of dismissing the older generation, the 20-somethings might consider how they will avoid that fate.

[mLuby]

> My company fixes recruiting process and software problems. Hats off to Amazon for this. I probably have the pot smoker conversation about once a month, usually with a 50-something or older executive that is running a factory short-staffed.

Reading between the lines, the exec is trying to hire more workers for their factory, and wants to know if they can stop testing for marijuana so they'll be able to hire more workers. To which the poster, who has recurring experience with this issue, must (unfortunately) recommend against it because of the reasons they enumerate.

Or maybe it was just a close-minded, ignorant ageist comment. Better to assume positive intent though.

[wolverine876]

I asked, I didn't assume anything.