Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

You can be fired for using medical marijuana, justices rule

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
kpete Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-10-11 02:41 PM
Original message
You can be fired for using medical marijuana, justices rule
You can be fired for using medical marijuana, justices rule
Employers in Washington state are allowed to fire employees who fail a drug test, even if they have valid medical-marijuana authorization, the state Supreme Court ruled Thursday.

By J.B. Wogan
Seattle Times staff reporter

It turns out that you can be fired for legally using medical marijuana in Washington state.

The Washington state Supreme Court ruled Thursday that TeleTech Customer Care, a Colorado-based firm that handles customer service for Sprint from its Bremerton facility, was allowed to fire a woman for failing its required drug test.

The plaintiff, who sued under the pseudonym Jane Roe, was pulled out of her training class after a week and fired Oct. 18, 2006, because she failed a pre-employment drug test. She had a valid medical-marijuana authorization from a doctor.

the rest:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2015274787_medpot10m.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Lizzie Poppet Donating Member (255 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-10-11 02:44 PM
Response to Original message
1. Next stop: the SCOTUS
But given so many recent (and not-so-recent) decisions there, I don't really expect this abomination of a ruling to be overturned.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sakabatou Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-10-11 02:44 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. I know
Another step backward.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GKirk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-10-11 02:45 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. I'm not sure how the SCOTUS could help
it's still against federal law to smoke pot.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truebrit71 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-10-11 02:45 PM
Response to Original message
3. In effect you can be fired for having cancer....Nice!
:eyes:

This is un-fucking-believable...

Like Alan Grayson said... GOP health Plan 1) Don't get sick 2) If you do get sick, die quickly...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GKirk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-10-11 02:46 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. That was kind of a leap n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hubert Flottz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-10-11 02:48 PM
Response to Original message
6. Welcome to Germany 1939...
The Nazis are HERE!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChrisBorg Donating Member (411 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-10-11 04:06 PM
Response to Original message
7. This is a problem that the Washington State Legislature needs to address.
"In court documents, the company said its contract with Sprint required drug testing and makes no exception for medical marijuana.

Roe's attorney argued that state law implied employers had to accommodate medical-marijuana use outside the workplace. The court disagreed in a 8-1 decision, explaining that the law explicitly permits employers to disallow on-site medical-marijuana use, but remains mum about medical-marijuana use outside the workplace.

The state Supreme Court majority opinion noted that the state Human Rights Commission, which investigates employee discrimination cases, cannot pursue claims related to medical-marijuana use because it is illegal under federal law."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-10-11 04:12 PM
Response to Original message
8. Wait a minute...
Edited on Fri Jun-10-11 04:12 PM by EC
The last UA I had, I had to sign the release and I sat and read it first. It specifically said I would fail the test if any drugs for which I had no prescription, were found. Doesn't the doctor give a prescription for it? Or have the releases changed?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
former9thward Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-10-11 04:24 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. Precriptions do not overrule federal law.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat May 04th 2024, 12:16 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC