Mark Megahan
Thanks to a 420 friendly ruling by the New Hampshire State Supreme Court, “medical cannabis could be allowed as a workplace accommodation for people with disabilities.” It’s nice to see that at least one state is willing to reconsider the draconian reefer madness legal statutes and craft legislation which makes sense in the twenty-first century.
Cannabis at work
Before you spark up a doobie on your lunch break, just because cannabis “could be allowed as a workplace accommodation for people with disabilities,” it doesn’t mean you can toke on the job.
The New Hampshire Supreme Court took a squint at the issue with a more relaxed frame of mind but they weren’t too stoned to miss the snags. They don’t say businesses “must” allow happyweed as an accommodation, only that pot “should be tolerated as one of many accommodations considered.”
It all started when Scott Paine was detailing cars for Ride-Away. Not like he’s an air traffic controller or anything. Scott has post-traumatic stress disorder. He was legally “enrolled in the state medical cannabis program for the condition.”
The only problem was he kept flunking his whiz-quiz. Paine “was drug-tested regularly at Ride-Away and requested an exception from the company’s drug-testing protocol.”
Scott responsibly limited his request “to off-duty conduct only and he never requested to use cannabis or to be under the influence of it while at work.” Ride-Away handed him a major bummer. Not only did they deny his request, they fired him.
The managers were so sketchy about the actual reason for going all Nancy Reagan on him and flatly saying “NO,” that the company’s lawyers couldn’t even figure out why “the request was denied.”
Failure to accommodate
Paine was smart enough to challenge the decision in court. He filed suit alleging failure to accommodate the prescribed “treatment of his disability under New Hampshire’s anti-discrimination law.” Ride-Away countered with verbal tap-dancing.
Their lawyers argued that the definition of “disability” excludes the “current, illegal use of or addiction to a controlled substance as defined in the Controlled Substances Act.” When the Supreme Court got their hands on the case they demanded to know what Ride-Away attorneys were smoking. Cannabis, the company insists “remains a federally-outlawed substance.”
The court says simply ignoring their legal obligation is discrimination. Pain is allowed the “use of cannabis to treat his PTSD” and New Hampshire says it’s legal, no matter what the White House has to say.
The ruling is certainly a move in the right direction but it’s far from being the definitive last word on the subject.
The court totally disagreed with Ride-Away and the offhand way they ruled out cannabis consumption. Paine had a right to at least kick around a compromise solution which both sides could agree to.
The court called that an “interactive process” to negotiate something reasonable. They also noted that pot has accepted medicinal value and is properly regulated but don’t even think about asking to be accommodated using meth or heroin or coke. At least, not this decade.
