Top Law Schools

I hate that this even needs to be asked but oh well.

I interviewed at a midsize firm in NYC, offer likely coming soon (fingers crossed) - will they drug test?

My wife and I went with another couple to a state where MJ is legal back in the first week of August. The four of us wound up smoking...a lot. We had a great time lol. I had decided I would start a job search in September but when I mentioned this to a connection of mine he brought up an opportunity of joining him at his firm and I jumped at it, so things have moved a bit quicker than expected. At this point the last time I smoked was about 30 days ago but being paranoid I took an at-home test and surprisingly it's still in my system.

I've heard firms don't typically test, is that right?

Separately, if it turns out they do, I'm considering being honest with my connection and telling him "hey this is very embarrassing but remember that trip I took to [x state], well.." etc and seeing if they can delay? I don't know, thoughts?

Highly unlikely that they’ll drug test. Also surprising the mj is still in your system. I bet it’s out of a standard urine test very soon.

RaceJudicata wrote:Highly unlikely that they’ll drug test. Also surprising the mj is still in your system. I bet it’s out of a standard urine test very soon.

Thanks, yeah I was surprised as well. I'm fairly lean but I've been doing some extra cardio, maybe that's pushing it out of my system now? I don't know. I've seen some studies say it can stay in your system as long as like 2-3 months, hope that isn't me.

lol there'd be no lawyers

Anonymous User wrote:lol there'd be no lawyers

LOL

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:lol there'd be no lawyers

LOL

I've mentioned this before when this question is asked. While firms are unlikely to test, associates can and are seconded to clients. And clients are much more likely to test.

I'm guessing most firms would rather not offer an associate only to get a call from the client's HR department. It's not a common scenario, but one folk should consider.

More common would be an in-house opportunity coming up in a few years time.

albanach wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:lol there'd be no lawyers

LOL

I've mentioned this before when this question is asked. While firms are unlikely to test, associates can and are seconded to clients. And clients are much more likely to test.

I'm guessing most firms would rather not offer an associate only to get a call from the client's HR department. It's not a common scenario, but one folk should consider.

More common would be an in-house opportunity coming up in a few years time.

I understand what you are saying about the in house positions, but other than that can you explain what you mean because I'm confused. Are you saying a person could get hired at a firm, go through that whole process, then first day get staffed on a matter and home Depot is like, excuse me Morgan Lewis, where are Mr. Newguys test results? You know we only like drug free Juniors on our matters.

Anonymous User wrote: I understand what you are saying about the in house positions, but other than that can you explain what you mean because I'm confused. Are you saying a person could get hired at a firm, go through that whole process, then first day get staffed on a matter and home Depot is like, excuse me Morgan Lewis, where are Mr. Newguys test results? You know we only like drug free Juniors on our matters.

Highly unlikely that your firm is going to drop you on a client on your first day. But second year attorneys and above do get seconded. Maybe a client needs maternity cover for their in-house department or a client is facing major litigation and needs additional in-house coverage for the rote work their department would normally cover. Or you might have a specialist skill set that a client needs full-time for a period.

The client likely has their own on-boarding process and that could involve drug testing. My completely speculative guess would be that the more regulated the industry, the more likely that is. So, if you're sent to silicon valley, it's unlikely, but at a drug manufacturer or a security company it's possible.

These opportunities probably don't come up that often, but it's something to be aware of.

OP here, thanks for the insight everyone, sounds like it should be a nonissue. Fwiw I was tested for an in-house position (permanent, not a secondment).

Anyone want to chime in on my approach in the unlikely event there is a test? That is, just being upfront with my connection about having been in a legal state a month+ ago and seeing what they say?

OP here with an update for TLS posterity:

Looks like there's no test! Got the offer last week and I've accepted and already authorized a background check. No mention of a drug test, and they've already told me once the background check clears I can hand in my notice, so I suppose that's that.

Not that it matters much now, as I turned up clean on a home test a week after my first post.

Anonymous User wrote:OP here with an update for TLS posterity:

Looks like there's no test! Got the offer last week and I've accepted and already authorized a background check. No mention of a drug test, and they've already told me once the background check clears I can hand in my notice, so I suppose that's that.

Not that it matters much now, as I turned up clean on a home test a week after my first post.

Nice. Congrats on the new job!