Employment Discrimination Case Involving Medical Marijuana Dismissed in Pennsylvania
Tags : Drug Screening
Allegheny County argued that, in addition to the federal prohibition on marijuana, stricter standards apply for prison employees than would be prudent for employees operating in other settings and professions.
Plaintiff Andrew Reed sued the county in October, 2020 alleging wrongful denial of a position as a corrections officer at the Allegheny County jail based on testing positive for marijuana. Plaintiff alleged that an HR representative with the county stated that his medical marijuana use for Reed's medical condition would not pose an issue. According to the complaint, Reed was ultimately passed over for the position because "the legal team couldn't come to a decision on whether to hire him."
In its request for a motion to dismiss, Allegheny County stated that Reed claimed he should have been eligible to request accommodation under the federal Americans with Disabilities Act and the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act. However, his claims were not based on the medical condition that qualified him for a state medical marijuana card but rather solely around the county's alleged job denial based on his use of medical marijuana.
Attorneys on behalf of the county argued that medical marijuana users can be denied employment at the Allegheny County jail per federal prohibition on marijuana in conjunction with the jail's particular role incarcerating individuals accused or convicted of violating drug prohibitions.
In a brief supporting its motion to dismiss, county attorneys argued that "Marijuana is a Schedule 1 'controlled substance' under the Federal Controlled Substances Act. The jail is charged with enforcing the law and holding those behind bars who are charged or convicted with violating the law. This law enforcement agency cannot be in the position to hire employees who are in ... violation of criminal laws."
While Pennsylvania's Medical Marijuana Act states that no employer may discriminate against, fire or refuse to hire an employee solely because of their status as a medical marijuana patient, these were not the reasons Reed was denied the position. "The complaint establishes that the reason Mr. Reed was not hired was not because he had a certification to use medical marijuana, but because he failed a drug test and sought to work in a law enforcement facility that must uphold federal and state crime laws," the brief said.
Employers are encouraged to review federal and state law regarding medical marijuana and how those impact hiring decisions across all business sectors, both public and private.
Posted: February 15, 2021
All Rights Reserved © 2021 Business Information Group, Inc.
This document and/or presentation is provided as a service to our customers. Its contents are designed solely for informational purposes, and should not be inferred or understood as legal advice or binding case law, nor shared with any third parties. Persons in need of legal assistance should seek the advice of competent legal counsel. Although care has been taken in preparation of these materials, we cannot guarantee the accuracy, currency or completeness of the information contained within it. Anyone using this information does so at his or her own risk.
What our clients are saying
We cannot express enough how much we have enjoyed working with BIG! It has really benefitted our processing and ease of doing business!
I enjoy collaborating with BIG, and know that if I have to reach out with a question/concern, a positive attitude with a willingness to find resolve is on the other side of an email or a phone call.
You have been the most professional and most helpful business partner that I have ever been associated with — always there to assist us and with rapid turnaround times.
I am confident whenever we add a product with your company that I will have a good experience.
We have received superior service and we know this is what you and your team strive for. We are grateful for the dedication, level of professionalism and effort shown.