Walmart sued after firing medical marijuana user

[libertytyranny]

Originally Posted by Tilted

I think Walmart's point is that they didn't fire him based on animus toward marijuana use, or to punish him for bad behavior, but out of concern for safety in light of how his marijuana use might affect that. I think its general position is that his use might interfere with his ability to proficiently and safely perform his duties. I've no idea whether or not its position is well-founded.

To me that's no different than someone taking anti-anxiety meds, pain medicine, had a sleeping pill the night before, took allergy medicine, has to take something for seizures, or even chantix to quit smoking. It is difficult to judge which drugs affect people in which way..if they were to fire everyone on some sort of drug that COULD affect their work..they wouldn't have anyone left. I don't think many people would like to know just how many nurses in hospitals are taking anti-anxiety (knew a nurse, no joke..who took a twice daily dose of ativan..enough to probably knock out a horse) and depression meds..and they are DESIGNED to work on your brain. I think they are going to have a difficult time with this one. If he was stumbling and falling because of weed..he was WAAAAAYYYY high and they would know it. So if that's the case..good fire him. But JUST for testing positive..I don't think so.



Edit- I would be more likely to think it is his brain tumor causing lack of balance...rather than the pot.

[hvp05]

Originally Posted by libertytyranny

It is difficult to judge which drugs affect people in which way..if they were to fire everyone on some sort of drug that COULD affect their work..they wouldn't have anyone left.

I see your point. We all know the commercials for drugs where they list 70 possible side effects, ranging from drowsiness to upset stomach to anal leakage. However, isn't pot pretty consistent in its effects? Most everyone who smokes experiences distorted perception, lessened coordination and ability to react, and weakened judgment. Those reasons are why recreational users like it, because of the trip and feeling goofy and/or feeling very relaxed.

As has already been stated, for some positions [in the store], those effects may not greatly hinder this guy's ability to do his job, but for other positions those effects could render him a danger to himself and others.

[tomcatter]

Any medication that you are prescribed is overlooked on most drug sreens unless the employeee is under investigation after an accident or mishap.
... Except cannabis. The largest problem is that the metabolites left in the body after the psycoactive THC is broken down can stay in one's system up to 30 days, and therefore is harder to prove that the employee was not under the influence at the time of the accident...
...It's interesting, I see people come to work hungover and sometimes still drunk all the time. The worst I've ever seen is them being told to home for the day.

[kwillia]

Originally Posted by itsbob

He's 30 years old, has worked at Wal Mart for five years, a father of two..

And he lights up..

Why am I NOT surprized??

Reaching for the gold ring, but not trying TOO hard. He might pull something.

How rude and very closed minded. I see a man who is at least employed and willing to work at a sucky job for income.

[tomcatter]

Originally Posted by kwillia

How rude and very closed minded. I see a man who is at least employed and willing to work at a sucky job for income.

Yeah, I didnt get that either. But I guess you are automatically labeled lazy and a criminal if you use cannabis for a medical condition.

[Lenny]

I cannot find that the guy is still taking chemotherapy treatments (the only half-way, sort-of proven) reason to recommend taking marijuana. Using dope for pain is way out of the realm of indications. If the guy is in so much pain he has to resort to illegal drugs, he probably shouldn't be working on a physically demanding or alertness demanding job. It doesn't tell us what his job was.

But the bottom line it that WalMart is allowed by law to set the conditions for continued employment and utilization of illegal drugs is a legitimate cause for discharge. Even Sam Walton would agree with that!

[tomcatter]

Originally Posted by Lenny

If the guy is in so much pain he has to resort to illegal drugs.

Casias began using marijuana on his oncologist's recommendation after Michigan voters had approved medical marijuana use in 2008.

Originally Posted by Lenny

But the bottom line it that WalMart is allowed by law to set the conditions for continued employment and utilization of illegal drugs is a legitimate cause for discharge.

This is a law regulated by the Federal Government, under the Drug Free Workplace Act.

In some 15 states marijuana has been accepted as a bonafide medicinally used drug, however it has not been endorsed by the Federal Government despite numerous requests by the American Medical Association.

It is interesting to note that Marijuana is still classified as a schedule I substance by the Drug Enforcement Administration. (The same schedule including most opiates which are accepted for medical use.)

Schedule I substances are defined as:

(A) The drug or other substance has a high potential for abuse.
(B) The drug or other substance has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States.
(C) There is a lack of accepted safety for use of the drug or other substance under medical supervision.

When it comes to a drug that is currently listed in schedule I, if it is undisputed that such drug has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States and a lack of accepted safety for use under medical supervision, and it is further undisputed that the drug has at least some potential for abuse sufficient to warrant control under the CSA, the drug must remain in schedule I. In such circumstances, placement of the drug in schedules II through V would conflict with the CSA since such drug would not meet the criterion of "a currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States." - 21 USC 812(b).

Eventually, I forsee a case such as this being brought before the Supreme Court challenging this. Reserved powers under The United States Constution are those that have been reserved specifically for the states or are of a traditionally state scope. These consist mostly of police powers, such as providing fire and police protection, establishment of health regulation, licensing, and education.

Yes, this topic is one that I continually harp on, as it affects me as well...

Honestly, I could care less about outright legalization. I feel it is time to reexamine these laws which we have allowed to regulate our interests as there are many beneficial uses of this plant and it's derivatives. I just do not believe that one should be labeled a criminal or be subjected to loss of employment over a medical necessity. It may be an issue for an employer to accomodate for an employee's medical needs however, no one has been fired for prescribed use of any other drug which could interfere whith their duties or becoming pregnant and unable to perform all tasks which they were hired for...

In other words, I feel that all of this is a travesty and outright hypocricy on the Federal Government's behalf as marijuana's use as a beneficial medicinal option. We have quite a few other drugs which fall under the DEA's definition of schedule I, and are perfectly legal and you can buy at your local liquor store.

[tomcatter]

Wow, I must have previewed and edited this post at least 30 times to check for and correct my grammatical mistakes! I really need to go back to school and take some english classes! Sorry if I missed anything!

[Tilted (Premo)]

Originally Posted by Lenny

I cannot find that the guy is still taking chemotherapy treatments (the only half-way, sort-of proven) reason to recommend taking marijuana. Using dope for pain is way out of the realm of indications. If the guy is in so much pain he has to resort to illegal drugs, he probably shouldn't be working on a physically demanding or alertness demanding job. It doesn't tell us what his job was.

But the bottom line it that WalMart is allowed by law to set the conditions for continued employment and utilization of illegal drugs is a legitimate cause for discharge. Even Sam Walton would agree with that!

He is no longer getting chemotherapy treatments. According to the complaint, he uses marijuana to get temporary relief from chronic and severe pain. He claims that he never uses it at work, is never under the influence of it at work, and uses it only once a day when he gets home from work. If it's the only thing that works to provide him a measure of relief (and that's the essence of what he claims), then I'm glad he has access to it. I can't imagine what it would be like to be in severe pain almost all of the time.

As to what his job was, he was an inventory control manager. He was also named Associate of the Year in 2008.

Regarding your last paragraph, I'm not so sure that's correct. Apparently, Michigan law provides some protections for employees who are authorized to use medical marijuana. There might be some interesting questions here regarding conflicts between state and federal law.

[Merlin99 (Premo)]

Originally Posted by Tilted

He is no longer getting chemotherapy treatments. According to the complaint, he uses marijuana to get temporary relief from chronic and severe pain. He claims that he never uses it at work, is never under the influence of it at work, and uses it only once a day when he gets home from work. If it's the only thing that works to provide him a measure of relief (and that's the essence of what he claims), then I'm glad he has access to it. I can't imagine what it would be like to be in severe pain almost all of the time.

As to what his job was, he was an inventory control manager. He was also named Associate of the Year in 2008.

Regarding your last paragraph, I'm not so sure that's correct. Apparently, Michigan law provides some protections for employees who are authorized to use medical marijuana. There might be some interesting questions here regarding conflicts between state and federal law.

I think there would be some difference between the conflict between state and federal under Obama and the conflict between state and federal under Bush. (I know it doesn't read right, but you get the gist of it)