Whew!

That was a heavy conversation.

Regarding my "situation" at work, Aerotek got back to me today and said there may be a waiver form that my supervisor could sign, and then called me back telling me I could no longer be employed through Aerotek, but that I should talk to Carlos in the morning about seeing them hire me on there.

That left me with hope but a bit of an uneasy feeling.

The recruiter then called me back about 20 minutes later; he's always been very friendly.

Anyways, he's like, man to man, this is no big deal. He informs me that I should know it normally only stays in your system 7-30 days, and that there is a product down the street in the pharmacy that will ensure you pass 100%. Good information to know.

I obviously thank him for being so helpful (as I was afraid Aerotek would take this the wrong way, so I tried to be as nice as possible.)

He then tells me I handled the situation in a very smart manner, by going to them and to my supervisor first. He goes on to mention what I should say, basically, "I really appreciate the opportunity to work here... would like to become a member of the team... I won't let you down... would have no problem taking a re-test". If he asks me how the problem occurred , I'll tell him that I used it on my honeymoon, as it was a present from my sister - which certainly is not a lie ;)


Also, he mentioned that Aerotek would ensure the job transition would go over carefree and smoothly.

Everything is going okay so far, I'm hoping it will go well tomorrow.

Damnit Jay

As far as I'm aware, Jay doesn't blog nor read blogs, especially my blog, hence the bluntness of the following muse:

Jay's always been weird: he prides himself in it, infact. I've really been thinking he's actually becoming quite a lot weirder lately, if you can believe it.

Jay sent a message a few days ago "Take Tina Kell of your list, because of this,that, and this other thing she did." First of all, it's none of my business, was the first thing I told him. Dani put it much more elaborately than I did:

"Jay you do realize that it's none of my business what goes on in their marriage, and frankly I don't think it's any of yours either. They may work it out, I've seen a lot worse., so as for me deleting her, I really don't care.
I never talk to her any way,but I think everyone should stay out of other peoples relationships and worry about their own shit"

Hopefully Jay takes that to heart: he has in the past, and enjoys to cause trouble in me + Dani's relationship. He has no business doing that, and really should stay out of his brothers.

Insurance companies...

I learned after watching "Sicko" by Michael Moore (which I realized is very biased against the US, nevertheless) that big surprise who started the HMO's in the US: Nixon. Why? I bet he got a cut of the profits that the HMO's would make by letting sick people die.

It seems to me, health care should not be denied to you if you have one of the million or so "conditions" that the HMO's have setup, such that you can't get insurance if you have them.

Never having to do a drug test for work before (I've only had a few jobs, most in Canada), it seems to me it's not about a safer workplace: it's about money.

Companies probably save money by ensuring all their employees are drug free... but let's wait a second here.

What's next? You can't smoke to get hired? Drink? Too much caffeine? Diabetes? Health problems? Genetics say you have to high of a risk for certain diseases/prepositions? Medicinal prescription of "illegal" drugs (morphine, marijuana, opiates, etc). Sorry. No job for you.

One of the reasons I'm glad I live in Canada: at least our government doesn't have their heads FULLY up their asses.

The US and drug screening

Ahhh... the absurdity of it all. When I went to my doctor/psychiatrist, and explained the situation, he's like "bloody stupid ass Americans" (yep, that's the way he said it.. heh.)

Anyway, back in early November, Aerotek (the recruitment company) informed me that they forgot to give me the drug screen.

The US is stupid about pot.. so I'm not going to say I use it. I tried the "flush method" that got me past the first part of the test, but apparently in the more detailed laboratory review, it spotted good ol' THC, and I got a call from the doctor (who was a uber bitch.. but hey, if I spent 8-10 years of school to become a doctor, and then tested piss all day, I'd be a bitch too.) The second hand smoke, haven't used it since my honeymoon in August "excuses" didn't work (she said it didn't matter, only a prescription.)

Hold on here.. so I fail the test if I smoked a joint 2 months ago (I did my reading after the test, unfortunately.. apparently THC metabolizes in your fat, and can stay around a very long time.) However, I could have snorted crack, popped some E, injected some heroin less than a week ago, but that's okay, and wouldn't show up on the test.

Logical system to me.;)

Anyway, although Aerotek has a 0 tolerance policy, after speaking with different individuals, I believe Link just has to have a clean screen on file for insurance purposes. Keeping my fingers crossed.

I asked my doc for advice (well, I had a slim hope that he might give me that perscription for MJ that would get me through the loophole.)

His opinion was what I was already thinking: if they like you, they'll keep you on. If they don't , it wasn't meant to be. I've spearheaded numerous projects so far, and my boss already wants to hire me on as a full employee. So I think I'm okay. In fact, I'm going to inform him before Aerotek gets a chance.

Working with Americans: what if Bush had made the right moves?

Is great overall!

Anyway, besides being made fun of (very funnily) of being Canadian in very many respects (eh!), the most notable interesting aspect has been learning political/social/cultural opinions of Americans.

Rick, the engineer who's been there the longest (and is very, eccentric?), and who happens to sit across from me, has very interesting opinions, which sometimes mirror my own, but most of the time are on the opposite end of the spectrum.

Anyway, he's a very educated, Republican. His views are logical, not just conservative in every way: he thinks as I do, that drugs should be legalized (even though his brother works for the "war on drugs" feds) .

Anyway, he noted to me that, although Bush did not win with a major% of the people's votes, neither did Clinton in either of his 2 terms (although, I pointed out to him, that Clinton never had an under 30% approval rating.) He argued that Ross Perot ate up 12% of the votes, most of which would have been Republican votes (that's arguable), enough to sway the vote either way.

An interesting break-up of Republican/Democrat parties: Democrats hold almost all the large cities, and Republican the rest :) I wonder if Canada would have a similar structure with the Conservatives / Liberals (which, really, are the only 2 significant parties.. the Bloq are a joke and the NDP too underpowered.)


According the him, the biggest mistake the current administration made was to not the War on Iraq seriously, right away.

He's right: had the US went into Iraq with perhaps 2-4X the force, and ready for a semi-long war, the sectarian violence would never have escalated to this level,the Iraqi people would have had better supplies/infrastructure (i.e. working electrical grid). Bush would have been praised for saving Iraq and "winning" a battle on terrorism, instead of being damned for muddling it up.

Ultimately: Cheney, Bush, and his government gambled on a war in Iraq (and are still struggling to win.)