Connect with us

Colorado Supreme Court to Rule on Whether or Not Cannabis Use is Means for Termination in the Work Place

 The Colorado Supreme Court has officially ended their rulings
on whether or not employers can reasonably fire cannabis users while the substance is
legal in the state. Although proceedings hav

Published

on

 The Colorado Supreme Court has officially ended their rulings
on whether or not employers can reasonably fire cannabis users while the substance is
legal in the state. Although proceedings have ended, it could be months before
deliberations come to a close and the state makes an official decision.

The issue in question has been going on since Jan. 2014— when
recreational cannabis was made legal—but was recently brought into hot debate
when Brandon Coats, a quadriplegic, sued Dish Network when they fired him for
failing a drug test due to cannabis in his system. Although Coats made it clear
he benefits from the medicinal properties of cannabis and never uses on the
job, he was still fired due to a zero tolerance policy.

The law that is being brought into question is the Colorado
Lawful Off-Duty Activities Statute. This law protects employees from being
fired for activities that their employers might not ethically approve of, as
long as the activities are not conducted on the clock and no laws are broken.

The defense for Dish Network argues that cannabis is not a
right outlined in the constitution, and therefore it cannot be considered discrimination
to fire on these grounds. However, Coats’ defense countered with the Off-Duty
Statute, and the point that cannabis is medicine for the seizures he suffers. “We
believe you can find a way for employers and employees to peaceably coexist,”
stated Michael Evans, Coat’s attorney. Coats pointed out that if it is OK for
employers to let their workers go for cannabis use, then “that means our
medical-marijuana amendment is really just for the unemployed.”

Although the trials are over, the justices are still trying
to determine the course of action to take in this case. Hopefully, in regards
to the monumental amount of people who medicate and use recreationally while
being an active part of the work force, the court will find in Coats’ favor. 

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *