California Court rules that employers may fire workers for using MMJ off duty...

Bosses may fire workers for using medical pot off duty, California's high court says

By Maura Dolan, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
12:36 PM PST, January 24, 2008

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, 46, 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."

More frigging laws!!! They are passing one up here in Washington that makes it illegal to smoke cigarettes in your car!!! This is the downside of electing dems. They really like writing ridiculous laws.

mother****s.....those ppl suck dude, straight up. I hope this crap doesn't happen in OR...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by killerweed420

More frigging laws!!! They are passing one up here in Washington that makes it illegal to smoke cigarettes in your car!!! This is the downside of electing dems. They really like writing ridiculous laws.

---

In my opinion thats good cigs are gross but it really is a persons choice to do what they want with their body. So long as they don't put others in harms way and smoking/lighting a cig while driving is no more dangerous then grabbing some gum out of your bag.

@ original topic

This is terrible but its gonna just end up hurting the economy. Cali doesn't realize how many of their own love mary jane. I foresee a lot of resignations or firings in the next few months. I bet mad testing gets done to employees in the next few weeks after this bullshit.

The issue at hand was pre-employment drug testing. Whether or not companies want to hit employees up with random tests will largely depend on whether they have done so historically or not. I doubt you'll see an increase in random testing, unless employers are just looking to find a reason to fire somebody in particular.

Another reason why people need to educate themselves about how to beat the piss cops at there own game.

...this is fking ridiculous...I like what mirken said about it..pretty much sums it up.:wtf:

"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."

Yeah I was not happy to read about this either.

http://boards.cannabis.com/northern-...ml#post1793938

Court Deals a Blow to Patientsâ?? Access
Help ASA Stop Workplace Discrimination Against Medical Marijuana Patients!

Dear ASA supporter,

California Assemblyman Mark Leno and Americans for Safe Access (ASA) are moving quickly to protect medical cannabis patients from employment discrimination in the wake of todayâ??s disappointing ruling form the California Supreme Court. In Ross v. Ragingwire Communications, the Court held that Proposition 215 does not prevent employers from denying employment or firing a legal patient if he or she tests positive for cannabis use.

Assemblyman Leno and ASA need your help to fight back against this serious challenge to patients all over California! Donate today to help us end patient discrimination and protect patientsâ?? jobs!

Anticipating the possibility of todayâ??s negative ruling by the CA Supreme Court, ASA has been working with state lawmakers to develop legislation that will protect patientsâ?? employment rights. Assemblyman Lenoâ??s decision to introduce ASA-sponsored legislation marks the first step of a new phase in the battle to end patient discrimination â?? but there is a long way to go.

ASA is bracing for a dramatic increase in calls for legal assistance and advice, and we must now gear up for a tough campaign to educate lawmakers and build grassroots support behind this crucial measure. We count on your help to keep fighting for patientsâ?? rights.Please take a moment to support ASA today!

ASA has been working on the Ross case for years and spent a tremendous amount of time and resources bringing this case to the Supreme Court. Gary Ross was fired for failing an employer-mandated drug test in 2001, because he uses medical marijuana on his doctorâ??s advice. â??All I am asking is to be a productive member of society," Ross told reporters after the ruling. Gary Ross is not alone - Here at ASA, we receive calls on our toll-free patient hotline every week from patients who are facing similar dilemmas.

ASA is grateful that Assemblyman Leno has come to the aid of patients by introducing a bill to prevent employment discrimination. We need help from our supporters right now more than ever to help move this bill forward. Please join ASA today and make your voice heard! Click here to help. Thank you for helping us defend the rights of Gary Ross and untold thousands of legal medical cannabis patients!

Sincerely,

Don Duncan
California Director
Americans for Safe Access

P.S. For more information, please see ASA's press release in response to today's ruling.

Not good to hear, but of course. Marijuana is against federal law period. Private companies can do what they want, last I checked everyone I know is a volunteer worker. If you don't agree with the employer, quit. :thumbsup:
Better yet, start your own!;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 8182KSKUSH

Not good to hear, but of course. Marijuana is against federal law period. Private companies can do what they want, last I checked everyone I know is a volunteer worker. If you don't agree with the employer, quit. :thumbsup:
Better yet, start your own!;)

---

While I sorta agree with this, I still think it's messed up. I think there should be some kind of fairness with an employer of all things. Although I say that, and mine sucks (our office can't wear jeans etc, but the office across town can, wtf?) I would love to start my own biz doing whatever, I hate working for ppl.

There needs to be more of us around guys, because if I had my own business, I sure as hell wouldn't fire Biff and Larry for smokin some bud.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 8182KSKUSH

Not good to hear, but of course. Marijuana is against federal law period. Private companies can do what they want, last I checked everyone I know is a volunteer worker. If you don't agree with the employer, quit. :thumbsup:
Better yet, start your own!;)

---

of course it's illegal period by federal law, even if state's have enacted legislation granting specific exclusion for those individuals who have consulted a physician and came to the conclusion that marijuana is the best medication for them...This is America...Federalism? ha...that doesn't exist in america any more.

Point being, these people are obviously making their lives better, and as I've mentioned, likely using it to enable themselves to be more productive..they aren't treated like everyone else when it comes to the enforcement of marijuana laws, and they most certainly shouldn't be treated as are your regular every day citizens when it comes to their use, and marijuana testing by their employers.

Let's put it in this sense, people who fail for opiates in their systems can show their prescription from a doctor, and no biggie, it's okay because your doctor says so. Why the fuck should marijuana be treated any differently in states where it's approved for medical use? People can INGEST pain pills at work as long as they have a prescription. I can understand how they wouldn't want someone to light up there at work, but they shouldn't be punished for using their medication by being terminated or discriminated, just because it's marijuana and 'against federal law period.' State law says it's a valid medication, the employers within those states should have to honor such laws.