cannabisnews.com: WA Court: Workers Can Be Fired Over Medical Pot
function share_this(num) {
 tit=encodeURIComponent('WA Court: Workers Can Be Fired Over Medical Pot');
 url=encodeURIComponent('http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/26/thread26599.shtml');
 site = new Array(5);
 site[0]='http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php?u='+url+'&title='+tit;
 site[1]='http://www.stumbleupon.com/submit.php?url='+url+'&title='+tit;
 site[2]='http://digg.com/submit?topic=political_opinion&media=video&url='+url+'&title='+tit;
 site[3]='http://reddit.com/submit?url='+url+'&title='+tit;
 site[4]='http://del.icio.us/post?v=4&noui&jump=close&url='+url+'&title='+tit;
 window.open(site[num],'sharer','toolbar=0,status=0,width=620,height=500');
 return false;
}






WA Court: Workers Can Be Fired Over Medical Pot
Posted by CN Staff on June 09, 2011 at 14:09:57 PT
By Mike Baker, The Associated Press
Source: Associated Press 
Olympia, Wash. -- Medical marijuana patients can be fired from their jobs in Washington state even if they only use the drug outside the workplace, the Washington Supreme Court ruled Thursday.Justices said in their 7-1 decision that state law does not provide any employment protections for medical marijuana users and does not require companies to accommodate those patients.
The ruling stems from a 2007 lawsuit by a woman who was fired from TeleTech Customer Care Management in 2006 after her pre-employment drug screen came back positive. She had told the company she was an authorized medical marijuana patient, but the company's drug policy did not make an exception for medical marijuana.The woman is listed in court papers as Jane Roe to protect her identity.State law only makes one reference to the workplace, saying that employers are not required to accommodate the use of medical marijuana on site. The woman argued that the law's wording implicitly requires employers to accommodate use outside the workplace.Justices disagreed, saying in the majority opinion that "the language of (the law) is unambiguous  it does not regulate the conduct of a private employer or protect an employee from being discharged because of authorized medical marijuana use."Justice Tom Chambers dissented, writing that it was unfortunate that Teletech's drug-screening policy doesn't take into consideration where the medical marijuana was used, whether it affects the employee's job performance or whether the company could accommodate an employee's medical use.He said the case shows that legislators need to review the law."To that end, I urge the Legislature to thoughtfully review and improve the act," Chambers wrote.Attorneys for both sides did not immediately return calls seeking comment Thursday.Source: Associated Press (Wire)Author: Mike Baker, The Associated PressPublished: June 9, 2011 Copyright: 2011 The Associated PressCannabisNews Medical Marijuana Archiveshttp://cannabisnews.com/news/list/medical.shtml
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help 
     
     
     
     




Comment #5 posted by Hope on June 09, 2011 at 21:43:52 PT
spauldingstars5 (The answer to your first question
Justice Tom Chambers dissented, writing that it was unfortunate that Teletech's drug-screening policy doesn't take into consideration where the medical marijuana was used, whether it affects the employee's job performance or whether the company could accommodate an employee's medical use.He said the case shows that legislators need to review the law."To that end, I urge the Legislature to thoughtfully review and improve the act," Chambers wrote.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #4 posted by spauldingstars5 on June 09, 2011 at 18:41:44 PT:
I have a few questions about this case
First, I would like to know what the one Justice had to say and why they voted for her? 
Second, Of the other 7 Justices how many of them had taken at least one pill that day that was prescribed by a doctor? This woman's medical marijuana was prescribed by a doctor. Also, how many coworkers took a pill that day? Either before, during, or after work. 
This is un constitutional! This is not what our country was built on. This woman should get her job back with pay for all days lost. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #3 posted by FoM on June 09, 2011 at 18:23:17 PT
JHarshaw
It's good to see you. The Welfare lines will keep on growing then. Throw them off of Welfare and we will have more homeless then we have already. I wish I could understand the logic in what they decided. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #2 posted by JHarshaw on June 09, 2011 at 18:06:02 PT
unemployable
Greetings FoM et al.
 Does this mean that medical marijuana users in Wa. state, being "unemployable", are entitled to a government pension?Just a thought, peace and pot.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #1 posted by dongenero on June 09, 2011 at 15:10:18 PT
WA employment law
Is there anything in Washington's employment laws regarding firing of employees for issues not related to their employment?Could I fire any of my employees who are baseball players because I dislike baseball, though they may only play baseball in their off-time?Does state law provide employment protections for baseball enthusiasts?Insert whatever personal activity you like.
[ Post Comment ]


Post Comment