Legislation Prohibits Employers From ‘Discriminating’ Against Job Applicant For Positive Marijuana Test
Bill says applicant may sue employer for violation of this proposed law
By Chris Micheli, February 20, 2021 9:29 am
February 19, Assemblyman Bill Quirk (D-Hayward) introduced Assembly Bill 1256, which would address cannabis screening tests. The bill would add Section 52.8 to the Civil Code.
The bill would prohibit an employer from discriminating against a person in hiring, termination, or any condition of employment due to the fact that a drug screening test has found that person to have THC in their urine.
In addition, the bill specifies that a person who has suffered discrimination in violation of this law may institute and prosecute in their own name and on their own behalf a civil action for damages, injunctive relief, reasonable attorney’s fees and costs, any other appropriate equitable relief to protect the peaceable exercise of the right or rights secured, and any other relief the court may deem proper.
AB 1256 would provide that the law does not prohibit an employer from conducting a screening test for THC in any of the following instances:
- The employer is required to conduct that test by federal law or regulations.
- The employer would lose a monetary or licensing-related benefit for failing to do so.
- The employment is in the building and construction trades.
The bill is expected to be heard in its first policy committee in March.
- Labor Union Insignia in California - June 1, 2023
- California’s Labor Code Rarely Applies to the Public Sector - May 31, 2023
- Are Legislative Findings in Voters FIRST Act Bills Sufficient? - May 30, 2023
19 thoughts on “Legislation Prohibits Employers From ‘Discriminating’ Against Job Applicant For Positive Marijuana Test”
Wow, the legislature is really shooting for California to be as dysfunctional and non-functional as possible. Ridiculous.
Nonsense. — Smart employers prefer their workers consume near harmless marijuana (at home, after work), rather than addictive, very harmful, violence-inducing, traffic-carnage-causing, hangover-producing alcohol.
The column below answers, at least in part, the “near harmless marijuana” crowd better than I could ever do. Not trying to change your mind, John Thomas, because that is not possible, but other readers here might be interested:
Quirk should get together with Wienerhead and they can make psychedelic drugs, heroin, cocaine, ecstasy and others drugs “prohibited from discriminating” against a job applicant for a positive test. This last week these democraps in Sacramento have come up with some absurdly insane bills. Without the California Globe we would not know about most of them.
When you can’t address the topic, distract and discombobulate. – We’re talking about near harmless marijuana and the precious lives of thousands of good citizens who are making the far safer choice over alcohol.
And I thought customer service was bad now.
It was. Reducing the harm of alcohol by allowing near harmless marijuana improves everything.
I find it beyond egregious that a lawmaker who has never set up and maintained a business – successful or other wise – is willing to introduce such codswallop?
As for Quirk’s glamorous Phd. I’d remind his constituents and others that throughout history, far more civilizations have been destroyed by the village genius than have been by the village idiot!
Do some research instead of venting your prejudice. – Every person who chooses near harmless marijuana over addictive, very harmful alcohol, improves their health tremendously – as well as the lives of their family and community.
Good. If Marijuana is legal, make it legal.
Perhaps your surgeon should be high when he does open heart surgery? Or do you only want sober people who interact with you?
The posted summary of the bill is incorrect. The proper language will be released in a later amendment. The bill is intended to restrict only drug tests that DO NOT detect impairment by THC – in particular, urine and hair tests for marijuana. Contrary to popular misconception, urine and hair tests are incapable of detecting actual impairment, and have no relation to job safety or performance. If they were subject to the same FDA testing requirements as other medical devices or drugs, they would be illegal.
That’s one of the lame prohibitionist arguments. – Does legal alcohol make your surgeon drunk when he does open heart surgery? — It’s even easier to be responsible with non-addictive, near harmless marijuana.
The whole state stinks from pot, have you noticed? Time to grow up.
Exaggerate much? – It’s time to grow up and trade addictive, very harmful alcohol for near harmless marijuana – before some real damage to health is done!
If you think this is bad it appears Dems are preparing a push to legalize heroin. Yup, they are floating stories about how great it really is.
Oh great, another fabulous, brilliant, ruinous idea from the Dems. And, did you know, they’ll tell you it’s INEVITABLE, right? — as Gruesome used to like to say about a certain other item he was shoving down our throats that the People of the State of California voted against TWICE.
What tunnel vision. – It was the fraudulently enacted marijuana prohibition that has been pushed down our throats since 1937! – It was perpetrated by soon-to-be-out-of-work alcohol prohibition bureaucrat, Harry Anslinger. He desperately wanted a new empire and no lie was too big to tell to get it.