Pubdate: Sun, 15 Jun 2008
Source: Albany Democrat-Herald (OR)
Copyright: 2008 Lee Enterprises
Contact: http://www.mvonline.com/support/contact/dhletter.html
Website: http://www.democratherald.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/7
Author: Hasso Hering
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/opinion.htm (Opinion)
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/mmj.htm (Marijuana - Medicinal)
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/testing.htm (Drug Testing)

MEDICAL POT LAW NEEDS A FIX

Oregon's medical marijuana law needs to be clarified in view of the 
latest court decision. The Supreme Court may do so eventually, but it 
would be better - more democratic - for the legislature to perform that chore.

In early 2005 the state Supreme Court ruled against a worker who had 
been fired from a forest-products plant because he used medical marijuana.

In a different case, however, the Bureau of Labor and Industries 
ruled in favor of a worker, a drill press operator, who had been 
hired as a temporary and who was let go in 2003 when he disclosed his 
medical marijuana use. The labor bureau ruled that his employer had 
to make a reasonable accommodation of his disability, which was that 
he was smoking pot off the job to relieve his nausea and stomach cramps.

Last week the court of appeals turned down an appeal by the employer, 
Emerald Steel Fabricators Inc. in Eugene, from the BOLI decision. The 
court upheld BOLI, saying the company had not followed the correct 
procedure in bringing up its main points.

This man had been hired for a temporary job, and the company's 
practice was to require a drug test before offering to keep someone 
on long term. After doing the job for a while, the employee disclosed 
that he had a medical marijuana card and wondered whether this would 
affect his chance of being kept on. His supervisor took the case to 
the owner, and shortly afterward the man was told he would no longer be needed.

There are two sides here, as anyone can see, and they conflict.

One side is that free citizens should have a right to keep their 
private life private, not just from the government but from their 
employers as well. As long as they show up on time and handle the job 
satisfactorily, what they do on their own time is nobody else's 
business. To accept something less is to grant that employers can 
also check up on whether you smoke tobacco at home, whether you have 
a drink now and then, and ultimately how dangerous your habits and 
hobbies are to your health, because this might affect the company's 
benefit costs.

The other side is that employers do have a legitimate interest in 
making sure their workers - especially drill press operators working 
around heavy machinery - are not impaired by the lingering effects of 
substances that may dull their senses. Otherwise the company runs the 
risk of people getting injured or even killed, and of the company 
then being sued, not to mention cited for safety violations.

The legislature could clear all that up. To protect employers, it 
could declare that medical marijuana is not protected as a 
disability. And to protect our privacy rights, it could say that 
employers can require drug tests, but not routinely, only for cause. 
- ---
MAP posted-by: Richard Lake