Radio host fired for possessing small amount of pot
July 3, 2008 by Fred HosierPosted in: Dubious decisions, In this week's e-newsletter, Latest News & Views
An employee is arrested and charged with possession of a small amount of marijuana at home. Do you fire him?
A radio station in Macon, GA, decided the answer to that question was yes.
Shane McBryde was morning drive host and program director of WMAC, a news and talk station in Macon.
Local media reports say a police officer was responding to a report of a man with a gun. The officer couldn’t find the man but did notice a strong marijuana odor in the area.
The officer followed the odor to a house. McBryde and six other people were inside.
McBryde admitted to having a small bag of marijuana. He was charged with misdemeanor possession and released after posting a $390 bond.
McBryde publicly apologized and said he accepts responsibility for his actions.
Let’s compare McBryde’s situation to that of top-rated nationally syndicated talk host Rush Limbaugh. Limbaugh openly admitted on his radio program years ago that he had become addicted to the painkiller Oxycontin. His name had come up as a possible purchaser in an investigation in a black market drug ring in Palm Beach, FL.
Limbaugh eventually pleaded guilty to one count of doctor shopping — a third-degree felony — in exchange for having other drug charges against him dropped. He agreed to participate in an 18-month drug treatment program.
In a separate incident, Limbaugh was detained over a mislabeled bottle of Viagra found in his luggage during a Customs search. Limbaugh and others were flying on a jet owned by the company that syndicates his radio program from the Dominican Republic. He had 29 100mg Viagra pills in his possession.
Recently, Limbaugh just signed a multi-year contract to continue his syndicated radio show “well into the next decade.” Reports say Limbaugh will make $38 million a year for the next eight years.
It should be noted that Limbaugh and McBryde worked for different companies.
Does your company have a no-tolerance policy for drug use? McBryde wasn’t working at the time and being a radio host isn’t a safety sensitive position. On the other hand, he was a public figure in the community because he hosted a prime-time radio show. Should any of that matter in the decision whether to fire him? How does McBryde’s situation compared to Limbaugh’s? Let us know what you think.
July 7th, 2008 at 10:52 am
The difference is that Rush is a SUPERSTAR. The same rules do not apply to those people. Just ask Britny Spears or Lindsey Lohan.
July 7th, 2008 at 11:03 am
First of all, we’re talking about LEGAL DRUGS, prescribed by a doctor, as compared to illegal drugs, as in NOT LEGAL. Both McBryde and Limbaugh obviously have a problem. However, since Oxycontin is normally prescribed for PAIN, I am assuming Limbaugh was originally given the prescription because he was having severe pain of some kind. It is not that unusual for honest, moral, well meaning people to get hooked on some kind of legal pain pill because doctors write prescriptions so easily and don’t track the length of time the individual has been on the pills. While I am not defending Rush Limbaugh, his situation is different that a person using an ILLEGAL RECREATIONAL drug like marijuana. It’s like comparing apples and oranges. If the radio station has a company drug policy, they should be following it. Our company has a drug policy. In such a situation as Mr. McBryde’s, we would follow our policy.
July 7th, 2008 at 11:43 am
The question here is “Is your private life subject to disciplinary actions while not on the clock”? When are individuals allowed to make mistakes in their personal lives and not have it subject to ridicule or disciplinary actions in the work place? Society allows celebrities to make mistakes (legal and illegal) to varying degrees, yet we still appreciate and enjoy their work. When are average Americans afforded that same generosity?
While I may not approve of Mr. McBryde’s recreational activities, I do believe that his personal life should remain personal, unless it effects his job performance. Employees should obviously be aware if their employer has a zero tolerance drug policy. This article did not identify if Mr. McBryde’s employer had one in effect at the time of the incident.
July 7th, 2008 at 11:52 am
Editor’s note: McBryde works for Cumulus, a radio company that owns upwards of 300 AM and FM stations mostly in medium and small communities across the U.S. To see the company’s drug policy on its Web requires an employee login and password, so it’s unavailable to the public.
July 7th, 2008 at 3:45 pm
This is why a drug free workplace policy should be in place AND it should spell out how to deal with such things. And yep, legal vs illegal substance matters. Last, its none of the company’s business except where defined in policy as impacting the company. And if the company valued the employee, some form of assistance (we use intervention contracts) might be in order to give the employee a chance to redeem their continued employment. Other places are more strict (termination) or lax (excuse it). Marijuana, although once probably the least harmful of the addiction substances is physically and behaviorally addicting and has long term consequences that impair memory and cognition and at minimum shouldn’t be tolerated at all where equipment operation or driving is required or at all if you want some clear thinking. And pot sold today is way-stronger that we used to have in the 60s. But remember, some very, very talented and creative people such as Louis Armstrong and Willie Nelson have been known to regularly smoke pot. Some European countries are far more tolerant than we when it comes to use or abuse. And in the US, prescription drug abuse is becoming the real problem — and its legal (in the case of a prescription). We still intervene when signs of impairment are evident and we routinely drug screen all employees randomly and screen all drivers and equipment operators routinely - but a more lenient employer might drop the randoms and only intervene when the signs of impairment are evident.
July 8th, 2008 at 4:28 pm
The company’s concern for their employees should only extend to work. If this person is in possession or using drugs at work, then the employee should be terminated. However, what the employee does on his personal time is his business, as long as it stays out of the workplace.
July 9th, 2008 at 7:57 am
Like others, I may not agree with McBryde’s “recreation”, I do agree that personal time and work time need separate consequences. The focus on legal versus illegal drugs doesn’t even apply when those legal drugs are being used for recreation, as is the case many times over! Oh, and I didn’t overlook the statement of Limbaugh pleading guilty to a felony “in exchange for having other drug charges against him dropped”. Like it or not the famous are treated differently by most - we just overlook and then forget; but the “regular” people have their lives devastated or completely changed when something like this happens.
August 4th, 2008 at 8:32 am
It seems that more and more workplaces are getting into our private lives. We have a reasonable suspicion and a post accident policy in effect and our plant is still productive.
The rich get richer and the poor go to jail.
Has anyone ever considered making criminal fines a percentage of a persons net worth instead of a dollar amount? Wouldnt that level the playing field as far as penalties?