Workers can be fired for using medical pot off duty, Calif. court says

[one...two...tree 2,762]

By Maura Dolan

Los Angeles Times Staff Writer

SAN FRANCISCO — California employers may fire workers for using medical marijuana with a doctor's recommendation while off duty even if the drug does not impair an employee's performance, the California Supreme Court ruled 5 to 2 today.

The state high court's ruling weakened an already beleaguered 1996 law that prohibits the state from criminalizing the medical use of marijuana. The court said the Compassionate Use Act, passed by voters, imposed no requirements on employers.

"The Compassionate Use Act does not eliminate marijuana's potential for abuse or the employer's legitimate interest in whether an employee uses the drug," Justice Kathryn M. Werdegar wrote for the majority.

Justice Joyce L. Kennard called the decision "conspicuously lacking in compassion."

"The majority's holding disrespects the will of California's voters who, when they enacted the Compassionate Use Act, surely never intended that persons who availed themselves of its provisions would thereby disqualify themselves from employment," wrote Kennard, who was joined in her dissent by Justice Carlos R. Moreno.

The court majority upheld the firing of Gary Ross, an Air Force veteran whose doctor recommended he use marijuana for chronic back pain and whose disability qualified him for government benefits.

Ross, 45, was hired by Raging Wire Telecommunications Inc. in 2001 as an administrator. Before taking a required drug test, Ross provided a copy of his physician's recommendation for marijuana. The company fired him a week after he started the job because of his marijuana use.

Ross sued the company on the grounds that it failed to accommodate his disability as required under a state anti-discrimination law. He also alleged that the employer violated his rights as a matter of public policy. A trial court and an appeals court ruled for the employer.

Stewart Katz, Ross'lawyer, said he was disappointed but not surprised by the majority's ruling "because of what the political realities are." He said the state Legislature could overturn the ruling by amending the marijuana law to prohibit employment discrimination.

Bruce Mirken, a spokesman for the Washington, D.C.-based Marijuana Policy Project, said the court majority based its holding on "an absurdly narrow reading of the law."

"The court is claiming that California voters intended to permit medical use of marijuana, but only if you're willing to be unemployed and on welfare," Mirken said. "That is ridiculous on its face, as well as cruel."

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-ma...0,3626395.story

[Peikko 1,575]

Talk about mixed messages.

[Krikit 1,164]

[Amby 490]

arses

[Jenn! 918]

How very unCalifornian of them.

[AnewKINDofFEELIN 0]

Legalization now. There is no reason for it to be illegal.

[Trompe le Monde 1,107]

legalize it and tax it - it's a billion dollar industry!

[AnewKINDofFEELIN 0]

legalize it and tax it - it's a billion dollar industry!

No #######. Think about the effect on the budget.

Tax money brought in from sales

Reduced prison costs for locking people up in a victimless crime

Reduced costs associated with the "war on drugs"

Finally, think about the effect it would have on the sale of marijuana. It would cut into the market of organized crime.

[garya505 2]

legalize it and tax it - it's a billion dollar industry!

No #######. Think about the effect on the budget.

Tax money brought in from sales

Reduced prison costs for locking people up in a victimless crime

Reduced costs associated with the "war on drugs"

Finally, think about the effect it would have on the sale of marijuana. It would cut into the market of organized crime.

And just think about how much fun it would be to have your coworkers high on pot! Yippee!

[Peikko 1,575]

Is one allowed to go to work drunk? Would one be allowed to go to work high?

[AnewKINDofFEELIN 0]

Is one allowed to go to work drunk? Would one be allowed to go to work high?

Nope and nope

[almaty 19]

no surprise to me..i have several referrals for + uas for mj in oregon.///the company wants them off...and on different meds..or they cannot work

[garya505 2]

Is one allowed to go to work drunk? Would one be allowed to go to work high?

It's more difficult to detect. I worked with one guy who would come to work high some days. I could tell he was high because his conversation didn't make any sense.

[Peikko 1,575]

1) Not necessarily true. Alcoholics try to hide their addiction and can sometimes pull it off.

2) That makes an assumption that those who use marjuhana are also irresponsible and would go to work high regardless of the rules.

[Ban Hammer 13,346]

1) Not necessarily true. Alcoholics try to hide their addiction and can sometimes pull it off.

2) That makes an assumption that those who use marjuhana are also irresponsible and would go to work high regardless of the rules.

as it's irresponsible to use it in most jurisdictions because it is illegal, i really can see them worrying about their character by going to work not under it's influence