United States News
See other United States News Articles
Title: Colorado Supreme Court: Employers can fire for off-duty pot use
Source:
The Denver Post
URL Source: http://www.denverpost.com/marijuana ... ms-lower-court-rulings-medical
Published: Jun 15, 2015
Author: Alicia Wallace
Post Date: 2015-06-15 14:23:07 by cranky
Keywords: None
Views: 14212
Comments: 80
Lawyer for Dish Network employee fired after using medical pot to treat muscle spasms calls ruling "devastating". Brandon Coats, right, with his mother Donna Scharfenberg sitting by his side, Sept. 30, 2014. The Colorado Supreme Court on Monday affirmed lower courts' rulings that businesses can fire employees for the use of medical marijuana — even if it's off-duty. The 6-0 decision comes nine months after the state's highest court heard oral arguments in Brandon Coats' case against Dish Network. Coats, who had a medical marijuana card and consumed pot off-duty to control muscle spasms, was fired in 2010 after failing a random drug test. Coats challenged Dish's zero-tolerance drug policy, claiming that his use was legal under state law. The firing was upheld in both trial court and the Colorado Court of Appeals. DOCUMENT: Colorado Supreme Court affirms ruling When the case went to the state Supreme Court, legal observers said the case could have significant implications for employers across Colorado. They also noted that the ruling could be precedent-setting as Colorado and other states wrangle with adapting laws to a nascent industry that is illegal under federal law. As such, the question at hand is whether the use of medical marijuana — which is in compliance with Colorado's Medical Marijuana Amendment — is "lawful" under the state's Lawful Off-Duty Activities Statute. That term, the justices said, refers to activities lawful under both state and federal law. "Therefore, employees who engage in an activity, such as medical marijuana use, that is permitted by state law but unlawful under federal law are not protected by the statute," Justice Allison H. Eid wrote in the opinion. The justices said the court will not make a new law. Current Colorado law allows employers to set their own policies on drug use. Coats' attorney Michael Evans, of Centennial-based The Evans Group, called the decision "devastating." "For people like Brandon Coats, there really isn't a 'choice,' as MMJ is the only substance both he and his (Colorado-licensed) physicians know of to control his seizures due to his quadriplegia," Evans said. "He has to have it. " A silver lining of the decision, Evans said, is that it provides clarity in a "scary, gray area" of state law. "Today's decision means that until someone in the House or Senate champions the cause, most employees who work in a state with the world's most powerful MMJ laws will have to choose between using MMJ and work," Evans said in a statement. Six of the seven justices decided on the case. Justice Monica Marquez recused herself because her father, retired Senior Judge Jose D.L. Marquez, was on the Court of Appeals panel that upheld Coats' firing. Sam Kamin, a law professor at the University of Denver, said the justices' decision comes as no surprise. "It's easy to make too much of this decision," he said. "It really comes down to interpreting this one word in this one statute." As a matter of statutory interpretation, the court got it right, he said. But for Coats and medical marijuana advocates, this is a blow, Kamin said. Coats was a "dream plaintiff" in that marijuana served as medicine, he said. Coats was rendered a quadriplegic by a car accident and used marijuana to control leg spasms. The cause likely would land in the hands of the state legislature, Kamin said. "I think (Coats') case is very sympathetic, and I think his case would be quite compelling before the legislature," Kamin said. 
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 53.
#1. To: cranky (#0)
It's a bullshit ruling. Can they also fire people for drinking away from the job if they aren't coming to work drunk?
Yes. There are tests to see if someone abuses alcohol. My company conducts such tests. They have to given the nature of the work. They test for pot too and other drugs. Even their offices in CO. Which is why this ruling answered a few questions I had.
I can see this with some occupations,but for a guy that answers phones for Dish Network?????? Where is the justification for that?
Companies set standards and apply them to all employees. We did that in the Army...even the cooks have to take a PT test and shoot their rifle. Where common sense comes in though is if pot is considered a prescription drug, the company should consider the script. If an employee is taking Oxycodine three times a day they will come up hot on a urinalysis too. How do they handle such if job performance decreases but viewed as a necessity to treat the patient? Something to consider. Another thing to consider is maybe these employers know a bit more than we do on how medical pot is used for just about any ailment under the sun. Thinking they know something.
Dish Network ain't the army. Nobody is going to go into their phone center and snatch up talkers to go out to climb ladders to install sat dishes. Most of the people who take and keep those jobs are probably handicapped and can't work regular jobs,so that's why they are there.
No, you are correct Pete, Dish network is not the Army, but it is an organization. Most organizations have standards and policies it wants all its employees to adhere to. As CZ82 pointed out a week or two ago even Apple Inc. and Google, two of the leftist behemoths, have a zero tolerance drug policy. They test their employees. They may support medical pot and recreational pot use politically, but not for their employees. But that is par for the course as libs are inconsistent. I guess Apple Inc. and Google just want their competition high, stoned and drunk. Good for their Bizz.
I also remember (when Colorado first decided to make pot legal) making the comment that employers would still be free to fire/piss test employees even though pot was now legal there. I also remember getting very few comments by some of the pro pot posters about that comment of mine. So they either didn't want to think about what I said or they already knew what I said would come true, but that hasn't stopped them from whining about stuff like this now.
#58. To: CZ82, nolu chan (#53)
Chan did a great lay down of the actual ruling and supporting law. Go up thread a bit if you were not pinged.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#7. To: sneakypete (#1)
Can they also fire people for drinking away from the job if they aren't coming to work drunk?
#11. To: redleghunter (#7)
Yes. There are tests to see if someone abuses alcohol. My company conducts such tests. They have to given the nature of the work. They test for pot too and other drugs. Even their offices in CO.
#21. To: sneakypete (#11)
I can see this with some occupations,but for a guy that answers phones for Dish Network?????? Where is the justification for that?
#29. To: redleghunter (#21)
Companies set standards and apply them to all employees. We did that in the Army...even the cooks have to take a PT test and shoot their rifle.
#35. To: sneakypete, CZ82 (#29)
Dish Network ain't the army. Nobody is going to go into their phone center and snatch up talkers to go out to climb ladders to install sat dishes. Most of the people who take and keep those jobs are probably handicapped and can't work regular jobs,so that's why they are there.
#53. To: redleghunter (#35)
have a zero tolerance drug policy. They test their employees.
Replies to Comment # 53.
End Trace Mode for Comment # 53.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]