As we feared, one of the most frequently asked questions we have been getting since Prop. 64 passed legalizing adult marijuana use in California is, “Am I now protected against drug testing on my job?”
Sadly, the answer is most often, “No.” Prop. 64 specifically allows employers to continue to discriminate against their workers, even when their marijuana use is during nonworking hours. In California, even medical marijuana patients are not protected against employment discrimination. California’s Supreme Court ruled in 2008 that Prop. 215 does not grant workers’ rights, and a law passed to change that in 2008 was vetoed by Gov. Schwarzenegger.
Fourteen states have made it illegal for an employer to not hire or to discriminate against either a job applicant or employee who uses medical marijuana, under certain conditions. Some also protect tenants’ rights, parental rights, and others.
Those states are:
The rights of Massachusetts medical patients were recently upheld in court, as were those of patients in Rhode Island and Connecticut. Read more.
*Maine’s voter approved initiative protects recreational marijuana users on the job, unless it can be proved that there is a safety concern. Read more. Nevada and New York City have passed laws protecting job applicants against discrimination due to drug screens for marijuana.
San Francisco has a law against employment drug testing.
Cal NORML is making it a priority to advance legislation to protect workers’ rights in California. Employment drug testing has been shown in federal studies not to improve worker safety, but it’s a great way to discriminate against cannabis consumers. We hope to sponsor a bill that will truly make marijuana legal for all adults and educate unions and employers about the needlessness of drug testing.
Join the Campaign! We will need you to lobby your elected officials to introduce and pass a bill.
You can also support our efforts by joining Cal NORML.
Federal Court Rules In Favor Of Worker Rejected For Medical Marijuana Use 9/19
A Connecticut woman’s rights under that state’s medical marijuana law were violated when a company refused to hire her on the basis of her legal cannabis use, and a lawsuit seeking damages against her would-be employer may proceed, a federal judge ruled. In 2016, Katelin Noffsinger filed suit against Bride Brook Health and Rehabilitation Center, a federal contractor, after a job offer was rescinded following a positive test for cannabis on a pre-employment drug test. Noffsinger had accepted a management-level position with the firm, which then scheduled a drug test. Prior to the test, Noffsinger informed Bride Brook that she was a qualified cannabis patient under Connecticut’s Palliative Use of Marijuana Act, and used the drug—namely, synthetic marijuana pills, consumed in the evening—to treat post-traumatic stress disorder following a 2012 car crash.