Jim Finnel
Fallen Cannabis Warrior & Ex News Moderator
A radio ad against Proposition 19 paid for by the California Chamber of Commerce's Business PAC depicts a stoned California work force. Here is the text, followed by an analysis by Bee reporter Peter Hecht:
Text
Imagine coming out of surgery and the nurse caring for you was high, or having to work harder on your job to make up for a co-worker who shows up high on pot. It could happen in California if Proposition 19 passes.
Prop. 19 would do more than simply legalize marijuana. Prop. 19 is worded so broadly that it would hurt California's economy, raise business costs and make it harder to create jobs. Employees would be allowed to come to work high and employers would be unable to punish an employee for being high until after a workplace accident.
Not only could workers' compensation premiums rise, businesses will lose millions in federal grants for violating federal drug laws. California's economy is bad enough. Prop. 19 will hurt workers and business and cost jobs.
Analysis
The chamber's claims contradict rules on marijuana in the workplace upheld by the California Supreme Court and federal law.
But, businesses may need to worry about employee litigation if Proposition 19 passes, based on a declaration in the initiative: "No person shall be punished, fined, discriminated against, or be denied any right or privilege for lawfully engaging in any conduct permitted by this act."
Yet the initiative also says the measure doesn't supersede "any law prohibiting use of controlled substances in the workplace or by specific persons whose jobs involve public safety."
The chamber's warnings of companies being defenseless against stoned workers – and in danger of losing millions of dollars in federal drug-free workplace grants – don't square with a landmark 2008 state Supreme Court decision.
In the case of a Sacramento man, a legal medical marijuana user who was fired by a telecommunications firm for testing positive for pot, the court ruled employers can set and enforce workplace rules against drug use and require drug testing.
The plaintiff, Gary Ross, contended his rights as a legal pot user under California's 1996 Proposition 215 medical marijuana law were violated when he was dismissed after results came in from a pre-employment drug test.
The court said employers can fire workers – or refuse to hire them – based on positive drug tests or impairment, whether the drug use is legal in California or not. It ruled the federal Fair Employment and Housing Act "does not require employers to accommodate the use of illegal drugs."
The court also said public intoxication laws remain in place – meaning that stoners in the workplace can be fired as easily as drunks.
NewsHawk: User: 420 MAGAZINE
Source: sacbee.com
Author: Peter Hecht
Copyright: 2010 The Sacramento Bee
Contact: Contact Us - sacbee.com
Website: Ad Watch: Anti-Prop. 19 spot distorts its impact - Sacramento Politics - California Politics | Sacramento Bee
Text
Imagine coming out of surgery and the nurse caring for you was high, or having to work harder on your job to make up for a co-worker who shows up high on pot. It could happen in California if Proposition 19 passes.
Prop. 19 would do more than simply legalize marijuana. Prop. 19 is worded so broadly that it would hurt California's economy, raise business costs and make it harder to create jobs. Employees would be allowed to come to work high and employers would be unable to punish an employee for being high until after a workplace accident.
Not only could workers' compensation premiums rise, businesses will lose millions in federal grants for violating federal drug laws. California's economy is bad enough. Prop. 19 will hurt workers and business and cost jobs.
Analysis
The chamber's claims contradict rules on marijuana in the workplace upheld by the California Supreme Court and federal law.
But, businesses may need to worry about employee litigation if Proposition 19 passes, based on a declaration in the initiative: "No person shall be punished, fined, discriminated against, or be denied any right or privilege for lawfully engaging in any conduct permitted by this act."
Yet the initiative also says the measure doesn't supersede "any law prohibiting use of controlled substances in the workplace or by specific persons whose jobs involve public safety."
The chamber's warnings of companies being defenseless against stoned workers – and in danger of losing millions of dollars in federal drug-free workplace grants – don't square with a landmark 2008 state Supreme Court decision.
In the case of a Sacramento man, a legal medical marijuana user who was fired by a telecommunications firm for testing positive for pot, the court ruled employers can set and enforce workplace rules against drug use and require drug testing.
The plaintiff, Gary Ross, contended his rights as a legal pot user under California's 1996 Proposition 215 medical marijuana law were violated when he was dismissed after results came in from a pre-employment drug test.
The court said employers can fire workers – or refuse to hire them – based on positive drug tests or impairment, whether the drug use is legal in California or not. It ruled the federal Fair Employment and Housing Act "does not require employers to accommodate the use of illegal drugs."
The court also said public intoxication laws remain in place – meaning that stoners in the workplace can be fired as easily as drunks.
NewsHawk: User: 420 MAGAZINE
Source: sacbee.com
Author: Peter Hecht
Copyright: 2010 The Sacramento Bee
Contact: Contact Us - sacbee.com
Website: Ad Watch: Anti-Prop. 19 spot distorts its impact - Sacramento Politics - California Politics | Sacramento Bee
