Pubdate: Thu, 15 Mar 2007
Source: Statesman Journal (Salem, OR)
Copyright: 2007 Statesman Journal
Contact:  http://www.statesmanjournal.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/427
Author: Aaron Clark, The Associated Press
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/mmj.htm (Cannabis - Medicinal)
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/testing.htm (Drug Test)

UNDER BILL, MEDICAL-MARIJUANA USERS COULD BE FIRED

Employers Would Be Shielded From Lawsuits By Users

Employers could fire medical-marijuana users who fail drug tests 
under a bill passed Wednesday by the Oregon Senate.

If it becomes law, the measure could shield employers from potential 
lawsuits filed by medical-marijuana patients who have been fired or 
disciplined for testing positive for the drug when they show up for work.

Without the bill, "employers will be left with individual lawsuits 
and appeals," said Sen. Rick Metsger, D-Welches. "I believe this is 
good policy for our state, and it is strongly supported by both labor 
and management."

For the 12 states that allow medical marijuana, the use of the drug 
by employees outside of the workplace is an increasingly complicated 
- -- and legally contentious -- subject.

Michael Cohen, an employment attorney with the Philadelphia-based law 
firm Wolf Block, said that only California and Montana have 
provisions in their medical-marijuana statutes that clearly protect 
workers from being fired or disciplined if they are state approved users.

States that don't forbid employers from taking action against workers 
who use medical marijuana have created a gray area, legal experts say.

A lack of clear policy from lawmakers or legal rulings from state 
courts has muddied the issue that also pits state and federal law. 
The federal government classifies marijuana as having "no currently 
accepted medical use in treatment."

In testimony earlier this year, several medical-marijuana cardholders 
said the Oregon measure would unfairly penalize them.

They said that most drug policies are enforced through urine tests 
that don't determine if users are impaired, but only if they used 
cannabis within the past few weeks.

In Wednesday's debate, Sen. Floyd Prozanski agreed, calling the bill 
"a very broad sweep at dealing with an issue that is going to 
discriminate against individuals who have not violated the intent of 
the safe workplace."

"They are not impaired; they are not under the influence while they 
are at work," the Eugene Democrat said.

Prozanski said he would try to persuade the House to change the bill 
so that it would not discriminate against a workers who are 
cardholders under the Oregon medical-marijuana program.

Groups such as the American Civil Liberties Union, which opposed the 
bill, said that testing for impairment, rather than drug use, would 
be a more effective way of creating safe workplaces.

Several representatives of companies said they already enforce such 
policies in the interest of workplace safety and would fire an 
employee who tested positive for marijuana.

In California, the state Supreme Court has agreed to hear a case 
between a telecommunications company and Gary Ross, who uses medical 
marijuana for chronic back pain from injuries suffered while in the 
Air Force. Ross, who worked as a systems administrator for RagingWire 
Telecommunications, was fired after he tested positive for cannabis.

Last year, the Oregon Supreme Court ruled against millwright Robert 
Washburn, a registered medical-marijuana user who was fired from his 
job at a Columbia Forest Products plant after urine tests detected 
traces of the drug.

The court's decision avoided the central issue of marijuana use 
outside of the workplace, however, ruling that Washburn's leg spasms 
weren't debilitating enough to qualify him as disabled.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Beth Wehrman