Legalized Marijuana Use Grounds For Termination Within A/E Firms?

MET • March 19, 2014

The legalization of marijuana use in Colorado and Washington is causing an uprising within the A/E marketplace.  It has been reported that firms are trying to determine policies that take in consideration federal and state laws while being mindful of employee and client safety. Speaking with operations and Human Resources executives on the legalized use of marijuana by employees, I am receiving one unified comment:

 

Marijuana use will not be tolerated-whether legal in the state the employee works or not.

 

Civil engineering  and architect employers believe that any potential impaired judgement could lead to fatal design issues or poor decision making. I asked several executives how recreational use of the drug  during personal hours is any different than staff consuming alcohol on their own time. Additionally, I asked “If an employee goes on vacation to Colorado or Washington, then smokes marijuana, returns and tests positive – what will happen?” I received a variety of responses to both these questions, but no clear answer. “Too many shades of gray. Employees need to take responsibility. If they are smoking in a legalized state on vacation, chances are they are smoking at their homes too.”  Emotions are running deep on this topic.

 

The Department of Defense has reported that contractors who test positive for any drug use may lose their security clearance. Similarly, other federal agencies require contractors/engineering firms to drug test staff working on their projects. This would clearly direct firms providing services to those agencies. Liability insurances for many firms are expected to rise.

 

NORML   shares  “ marijuana is the third most popular recreational drug in America (behind only alcohol and tobacco), and has been used by nearly 100 million Americans. According to government surveys, some 25 million Americans have smoked marijuana in the past year, and more than 14 million do so regularly despite harsh laws against its use. Our public policies should reflect this reality, not deny it.”

 

Many states and many more A/E firms will be dealing with this issue in months ahead. What do you think?

The Metzner Group Blog

By Carol Metzner October 22, 2025
Last night, I had an unsettling phone call with a client. It pushed me to assess whether "the client is always right." Here is what I came up with: In executive recruitment, "the client is always right" is a guiding principle. After all, clients trust us to understand their needs, align with their vision, and deliver top-tier talent. But what happens when that principle collides with another: the duty to place candidates into environments where they can thrive? Every recruiter has that moment of realization—a client may seek a professional, but their leadership style, company culture, or expectations send up red flags. Perhaps their demands are unrealistic, or their treatment of candidates raises ethical concerns. These situations challenge recruiters to balance two critical priorities: maintaining client relationships and protecting candidates from potentially detrimental placements. As recruiters, we’re not just matchmakers but stewards of careers and livelihoods. Candidates trust us to help them take the next step in their professional journey. If a client demonstrates behaviors or values that could lead to a toxic environment, we must assess and address the situation with integrity. This doesn’t mean severing ties with challenging clients immediately. Open communication is key—have a candid conversation to understand their expectations and share your observations. Sometimes, clients are unaware of how their actions or words come across and are willing to adjust. However, if it becomes clear that their approach contradicts your commitment to ethical placements, it may be time to reconsider the partnership. Ultimately, I have decided that "the client is always right" has its limits. As an executive recruiter, my reputation hinges on filling roles and making placements that benefit both sides. Walking away from a mismatched client might feel like a loss in the short term, but in the long run, it reinforces my integrity and ensures the candidates I work with continue to see me as an ally in their careers. After all, my genuine client is the principle of finding the right fit—for everyone involved. What are your thoughts? #civilengineeringexecutivesearch #architectureexecutivesearch #executivesearch #AEP #ethics #recruiterinsights
By Carol Metzner October 22, 2025
Many of us understand the significance of both short-term gains and long-term investments. When evaluating a new opportunity, the financial package plays a critical role—it reflects the value of your expertise and supports your aspirations, both today and in the future. However, compensation should not be the only compass. A truly strategic decision considers how the role aligns with your vision, challenges your abilities, and fuels your capacity to lead with impact. The right opportunity integrates financial reward with culture and mission that drive fulfillment, growth, and purpose. One should not accept an offer solely based on money, nor should one reject an offer solely because of financial reasons. Leadership is about balancing head and heart, value and vision. Let’s prioritize decisions that secure not just wealth but meaning. What principles guide your career decisions? #Architecture #CivilEngineering #ExecutiveSearch #Recruiter #AE #RecruiterInsights