Mich. Businesses Unsure How to Deal with Medical Marijuana Users

[MI Compassion]

*broken link removed*

Mich. Businesses Unsure How to Deal with Medical Marijuana Users
April 2, 2010

Businesses in Michigan are uncertain whether to fire employees who test positive for marijuana use but are authorized to use the drug under the state's new medical-marijuana law, the Battle Creek Enquirer reported March 28.

A Wal-Mart store in Michigan recently fired a medical-marijuana user after a positive drug test; state law allows medical use of the drug but does not provide any workplace protections for users.

"The law is very clear that employees cannot be intoxicated or use marijuana on the job, and nobody is saying anyone has the right to use marijuana on the job," said Greg Francisco, executive director of the Michigan Medical Marijuana Association. "At the same time, we would hope employers would have a sense of decency."

Greg Bond, a human resources official with the I.I. Stanley company, said the automotive parts and electronics maker recently enhanced its random drug testing program and has a zero-tolerance policy on drugs. However, Bond didn't know how the firm would deal with a medical-marijuana user.

"I think it will come down to: you can't be under the influence at work," Bond said. "The problem that you run into is, I don't believe there is a test out there that says you are under the influence now."

A union official representing workers at Kellogg Co. in Battle Creek said upcoming contract negotiations would address the treatment of medical users. "We're going to recommend that same [drug testing] procedure that's in place now, but with new people coming in, because of the law, we would like Kellogg to consider that particular qualifying patient as being still eligible to work," said Rocky Marsh of the Bakery, Confectionery, Tobacco Workers and Grain Millers Union, Local 3-G.

[philanthropy]

i motion that we form a committee within our organization where we contact union reps, ceo's, and business owners and sit down and have meetings with them about this issue. get them educated and on page

[peanutbutter]

There are two items being described here.

 

One is the situation where a person is stoned on the job. Due to the nature of marijuana, other clues would have to be gathered to show the person was under the influence.

 

The other kind of situation is where the person tests positive for metabolites. Employers in Michigan can not make the same assumption the state has made before.

 

Zero tolerance does not apply in the workplace.

 

zero tolerance (zt) is intended to catch ANYONE that ever uses marijuana AT ALL and deliver them into a world of bunny muffin.

It is a tool in the war against marijuana users! It is intended to punish users. It is not intended to make a safer world. It is intended to punish whenever possible.

 

PATIENTS ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO BE PUNISHED ANY LONGER!!

 

The war is over for patients!

 

The voters of this state decided that it no longer moral or logical to punish these people.

 

To achieve that goal a section was included in our new law.

 

4. Protections for the Medical Use of Marihuana.

 

Sec. 4. (a) A qualifying patient who has been issued and possesses a registry identification card shall not be subject to arrest, prosecution, or <strong>penalty in any manner</strong>, or denied any right or privilege, including but not limited to civil penalty <strong>or disciplinary action by a business</strong> or occupational or professional licensing board or bureau, for the medical use of marihuana in accordance with this act, provided that the qualifying patient possesses an amount of marihuana that does not exceed 2.5 ounces of usable marihuana, and, if the qualifying patient has not specified that a primary caregiver will be allowed under state law to cultivate marihuana for the qualifying patient, 12 marihuana plants kept in an enclosed, locked facility. Any incidental amount of seeds, stalks, and unusable roots shall also be allowed under state law and shall not be included in this amount.

 

Let me highlight:

A qualifying patient shall not be subject to penalty in any manor or disciplinary action by a business for the medical use of marihuana in accordance with this act.

 

Many people have said that Michigan is a "right to work state." That is correct. It was passed into law a long time ago.

 

THAT LAW HAS BEEN MODIFIED.

 

Our new law modifies any existing law to allow for the medical use of marijuana.

 

ZT is DEAD! In the courts and the workplace.

[philanthropy]

I will volunteer.

 

needed resources:

- a place to meet (preferably outdoor)

- collected minds that don't wonder and stay on subject

- people that are good with reading legal language, understanding it, and translating it into english

- people with good articulate speaking skills, good public relations skills, good debate skills, and a natural charisma/smile

- laptop with internet for researching name/contact info

- a printed copy of the MMMA law that we can highlight on

- copies of Michigan employment law (dont know why, because as peanutbutter said above

Many people have said that Michigan is a "right to work state." That is correct. It was passed into law a long time ago.

 

THAT LAW HAS BEEN MODIFIED.

 

Our new law modifies any existing law to allow for the medical use of marijuana.

 

can anyone think of more ideas of resources needed?

[DT61]

This can be absolutely life changing for the work place.

Please let all know how we can help.

[philanthropy]

This can be absolutely life changing for the work place.

Please let all know how we can help.

 

 

we need some volunteers to meet together. we can start here in this thread. heres my plan below

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

my 1st big question is the Michigan Labor Law. this is a right to work state (EDIT: i'm wrong, this is not a right to work state), but we need quotes with section identifiers from that part of the law posted here for reference. we also need any definitions that will apply to this section of the law posted.

 

now we have 2 conflicting laws. now i don't know enough about precedence of enacted state laws based on date. is what peanutbutter said about our new law over ruling the old legally correct? it makes since to me, but i've learned over the years that gov, politics, law, and life doesn't always follow the most logical path. we need someone with knowledge of this subject to post what law quotes they can to justify this thought process.

 

now if we can get these things posted then we have 2 of our 3 bullets. the 3rd will be the quotes from the mighigan mj law. i can get those in less than a minute.

 

so with those 3 pieces of ammo, now we need to get some people together and write some type of presentation. then deliver it to each other, and to other people so we can hear what counterpoints/arguments they will have against our logic. or questions that may show holes in our logic.

 

we take note of these counterpoints/arguments/holes and re-write our presentation to not only address them, but attempt to address them before our opponents even have the opportunity to think these things (use fancy sentence structure, logic structure)

 

once we have practiced this debate enough to feel confident that our argument/presentation is flawless, then we need to start meeting with business/labor organizations. i say we start with smaller businesses so we can get some practice and notoriety, then work our way up to larger corporations and labor boards. hardest part here is setting up the meetings.

 

 

 

 

if anyone is interested or has some thoughts/ideas to add to mine, please post here.

[DT61]

I am not looking to assign work - but there is a person who posts here often (or did) who has a talent for finding things just lie you are seeking - Freemannabis

We all have a talent we bring to the party - hoping it becomes a group project.

[philanthropy]

well i found his profile. i tried to msg him through that, but it says he is unable to use the messaging system... so i posted a comment on his profile. maybe he will take a look and check it out.

 

thank you.

[DT61]

Lets keep it alive - there is a lot of talent out there (here) and willingness to help -

[idge]

"my 1st big question is the Michigan Labor Law. this is a right to work state,"

I'm not sure why it matters but MI is not a "right to work State".
 

[philanthropy]

"my 1st big question is the Michigan Labor Law. this is a right to work state,"

I'm not sure why it matters but MI is not a "right to work State".



ok. what does this mean? what is the difference? what is the definition? (i don't know much labor law)

[DT61]

Right-To-Work Law
State labor law that permits someone to determine for himself/herself whether or not to join a labor union. The law avoids employers from making union membership a condition of employment.


http://www.legal-exp...to-work-law.htm

Also
Michigan Guidelines on the Right to Work
*broken link removed*

[Guest thequietone]

Lawyers.com had this to say about Michigan Labor Law.Lawyers.com

 

Employment

 

At Will

 

In Michigan, employees are presumed to be "at will." At-will employees may be terminated for any reason, so long as it's not illegal. Generally, employees who work under an employment contract can only be terminated for reasons specified in the contract. In Michigan, in order to overcome the at-will presumption, an employee must show that the employer made clear and unequivocal statements of job security to the employee.

[idge]

"employees who work under an employment contract can only be terminated for reasons specified in the contract."

But they can always lay you off without a moments notice. Wages our much lower in "Right to Work" States. We avoid the south, from Texas to Florida. Their wage scale sucks. The only "Right to Work" state that can match the scale here, is Nevada. But it's got a strip full of casinos going up and coming down every few years.

[sknkwrks]

This is a great topic wich brings many questions to mind and please feel free to add thoughts and comments. Here is my situation. I suffer from cronic cluster headaches and for them take a collection of meds I find that MMJ helps in many ways to ease the problem. I am a member of a union and to this point nothing has been said about how they will handle the situation had it ever come up. I have not told that I am a card holder (what is not known can not hurt) currently the job I am on is controled by the federal gov and they do random searches random drug screen and dog run threws and this is done by the department of home land security that being said its no longer state governed its the feds so if i tested positive i would have no backing. Or would I? So could I use the argument what i do on my time has nothing to do with work? or should i just keep using the pills and heavy narcotics and wait till i am on another job to use MMJ?

 

SKNKWRKS

[philanthropy]

ok, thank you all for those definitions and legal opnions. those are very helpful.

 

this leads me to a few questions that need answering in order to continue.

 

1) if we are 'at will' and can be 'terminated for any reason, so long as its not illegal' then can a business terminate an employee who is a MM patient who is sober at work?

 

"Sec. 4. (a) A qualifying patient who has been issued and possesses a registry identification card shall not be subject to arrest, prosecution, or penalty in any manner, or denied any right or privilege, including but not limited to civil penalty or disciplinary action by a business or occupational or professional licensing board or bureau, for the medical use of marihuana in accordance with this act, provided that the qualifying patient possesses an amount of marihuana that does not exceed 2.5 ounces of usable marihuana, and, if the qualifying patient has not specified that a primary caregiver will be allowed under state law to cultivate marihuana for the qualifying patient, 12 marihuana plants kept in an enclosed, locked facility. Any incidental amount of seeds, stalks, and unusable roots shall also be allowed under state law and shall not be included in this amount."

-Michigan Medical Marijuan Act

 

2) "denied any right or privilege"

we do not have the right to work, so are we protected from termination based on their in ability to deny any privilege?

in my opinion i believe we are protected. here.

 

3) "disciplinary action by a business or occupational or professional licensing board or bureau"

does this read disciplinary action by a business...

or

does this read disciplinary action by a business ... licensing board or bureau

???

if this reads disciplinary action by a business then we are groovy on that part in my opinion.

 

 

 

SUMMARY:

if my opinions on 2) and 3) are correct, then i believe the answer to question 1 is NO a business CANNOT terminate an employee who is a MM patient who is sober at work for failing a drug test for Marijuana.

 

NEXT STEP:

we need to agree wither or not these opinions, and law/law opinion quotes are sufficient 'ammo' to write a presentation.

[mizerman]

Our cause was just. The result of the Battle Creek March is being felt around the US. Patients rights are being considered. This is a huge step forward. The shot heard around the world! Join us April 17 for the Freedom March.

You know you can count on us to be there on the 17th. This Wednesday will be reserved for "sign-making day" and it will probably spill into Friday as well...lol

 

Was just chatting with a fellow classmate, who is an attorney, from my high school days down in Houston and he asked me if I knew about the demonstration that was in "some town up near me in Michigan".

 

Well, I told him my wife and I drove the 100 miles one way to stand in the cold that day and that we will be in Lansing this coming Saturday.

 

Honored to be with all of you that day in Battle Creek and looking forward to this Saturday as well. Most of all, I hope to get to talk with the young man who was fired from Wal-Mart.

 

Have a great week everybody.

 

Mizerman

 

p.s. sorry I had a hard time figuring out this new website and I hope I didn't bother too many people asking stupid questions...

[philanthropy]

This is a great topic wich brings many questions to mind and please feel free to add thoughts and comments. Here is my situation. I suffer from cronic cluster headaches and for them take a collection of meds I find that MMJ helps in many ways to ease the problem. I am a member of a union and to this point nothing has been said about how they will handle the situation had it ever come up. I have not told that I am a card holder (what is not known can not hurt) currently the job I am on is controled by the federal gov and they do random searches random drug screen and dog run threws and this is done by the department of home land security that being said its no longer state governed its the feds so if i tested positive i would have no backing. Or would I? So could I use the argument what i do on my time has nothing to do with work? or should i just keep using the pills and heavy narcotics and wait till i am on another job to use MMJ?

 

SKNKWRKS

 

good question, tough decision. the federal thing... ouchy... i will say this. i do remember reading a case where a MM patient (in michigan) went to federal court for a MJ charge and the judge basically said that as long as the patient can show the court a copy of their application (card haddn't arrived) within XX days then the charge would be dismissed.

 

wish i could pull that up, but i think it got lost on the old forums. i need to get a printer and start printing out portions of threads and digital articles that are significant.

 

sorry i do not have an opinion to post on this question.

[DT61]

You know you can count on us to be there on the 17th. This Wednesday will be reserved for "sign-making day" and it will probably spill into Friday as well...lol

 

Was just chatting with a fellow classmate, who is an attorney, from my high school days down in Houston and he asked me if I knew about the demonstration that was in "some town up near me in Michigan".

 

Well, I told him my wife and I drove the 100 miles one way to stand in the cold that day and that we will be in Lansing this coming Saturday.

 

Honored to be with all of you that day in Battle Creek and looking forward to this Saturday as well. Most of all, I hope to get to talk with the young man who was fired from Wal-Mart.

 

Have a great week everybody.

 

 

Mizerman

 

 

 

p.s. sorry I had a hard time figuring out this new website and I hope I didn't bother too many people asking stupid questions...

 

 

The 4/17 protest needs to get press time also - notices should go out to all friendly media sources and reporters.

[dotinthebox]

ok, thank you all for those definitions and legal opnions. those are very helpful.

 

this leads me to a few questions that need answering in order to continue.

 

1) if we are 'at will' and can be 'terminated for any reason, so long as its not illegal' then can a business terminate an employee who is a MM patient who is sober at work?

 

"Sec. 4. (a) A qualifying patient who has been issued and possesses a registry identification card shall not be subject to arrest, prosecution, or penalty in any manner, or denied any right or privilege, including but not limited to civil penalty or disciplinary action by a business or occupational or professional licensing board or bureau, for the medical use of marihuana in accordance with this act, provided that the qualifying patient possesses an amount of marihuana that does not exceed 2.5 ounces of usable marihuana, and, if the qualifying patient has not specified that a primary caregiver will be allowed under state law to cultivate marihuana for the qualifying patient, 12 marihuana plants kept in an enclosed, locked facility. Any incidental amount of seeds, stalks, and unusable roots shall also be allowed under state law and shall not be included in this amount."

-Michigan Medical Marijuan Act

 

2) "denied any right or privilege"

we do not have the right to work, so are we protected from termination based on their in ability to deny any privilege?

in my opinion i believe we are protected. here.

 

3) "disciplinary action by a business or occupational or professional licensing board or bureau"

does this read disciplinary action by a business...

or

does this read disciplinary action by a business ... licensing board or bureau

???

if this reads disciplinary action by a business then we are groovy on that part in my opinion.

 

 

 

SUMMARY:

if my opinions on 2) and 3) are correct, then i believe the answer to question 1 is NO a business CANNOT terminate an employee who is a MM patient who is sober at work for failing a drug test for Marijuana.

 

NEXT STEP:

we need to agree wither or not these opinions, and law/law opinion quotes are sufficient 'ammo' to write a presentation.

 

 

yes u can get fired for a poss drug screen look at walmarts they did it and got away with it

[+Dizledot]

ok, thank you all for those definitions and legal opinions. those are very helpful.

 

this leads me to a few questions that need answering in order to continue.

 

1) if we are 'at will' and can be 'terminated for any reason, so long as its not illegal' then can a business terminate an employee who is a MM patient who is sober at work?

**Currently most employee hand books state if the employee is under the influence of any illegal substance or alcohol....Most employers are still under the impression marijuana is illegal because they have not changed their so called rules to exclude MEDICAL MARIJUANA as illegal. I do agree that the employer could be challenged on any job termination as the result of a positive test for the legal use of medical marijuana.

 

"Sec. 4. (a) A qualifying patient who has been issued and possesses a registry identification card shall not be subject to arrest, prosecution, or penalty in any manner, or denied any right or privilege, including but not limited to civil penalty or disciplinary action by a business or occupational or professional licensing board or bureau, for the medical use of marihuana in accordance with this act, provided that the qualifying patient possesses an amount of marihuana that does not exceed 2.5 ounces of usable marihuana, and, if the qualifying patient has not specified that a primary caregiver will be allowed under state law to cultivate marihuana for the qualifying patient, 12 marihuana plants kept in an enclosed, locked facility. Any incidental amount of seeds, stalks, and unusable roots shall also be allowed under state law and shall not be included in this amount."

-Michigan Medical Marijuan Act

 

2) "denied any right or privilege"

we do not have the right to work, so are we protected from termination based on their in ability to deny any privilege?

in my opinion i believe we are protected. here.

 

3) "disciplinary action by a business or occupational or professional licensing board or bureau"

does this read disciplinary action by a business...

or

does this read disciplinary action by a business ... licensing board or bureau

???

if this reads disciplinary action by a business then we are groovy on that part in my opinion.

***Disciplinary action by all three

 

 

 

SUMMARY:

if my opinions on 2) and 3) are correct, then i believe the answer to question 1 is NO a business CANNOT terminate an employee who is a MM patient who is sober at work for failing a drug test for Marijuana.

 

NEXT STEP:

we need to agree wither or not these opinions, and law/law opinion quotes are sufficient 'ammo' to write a presentation.

 

I'm in full agreement with you on this and it needs to challenged in order to get the general consensus changed in regards to job termination due to medical marijuana use. I read public acts all the time, I'm a public official. These clearly state what you can and cannot do. For example the phrase "you may" means you may or may not do what its referring to but "you shall" reads that you must or mustn't do it.

 

This is one area that until someone challenges it perhaps the ACLU or otherwise we will be stuck in the dark ages and people will continue to loose jobs due to the ignorance on the employer.

[+Dizledot]

Sorry, forgot to add that I'm a business owner and have never terminated anyone for the use of marijuana, medical or otherwise. I did at one time have to terminate a young man with a Vicoden problem. By 3:00 he was so messed up on the drug he could no longer perform his job....almost fell 5 stories off a scaffold.