Posts

New Jersey: Adds Protections to Medical Marijuana Use by Employees

APPLIES TO

All Employers with NJ Employees

EFFECTIVE

July 2, 2019

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

As of July 2, 2019, the Compassionate Use Medical Cannabis Act now prohibits employers from taking any adverse employment action against a qualified employee based solely on the employee’s status as a registered medical marijuana user. The law applies to employees who have been authorized by a healthcare provider to use medical marijuana, and are registered as such with the state. Additionally, employees have the right to explain drug test results and the employer must provide written notice of their right to explain.

The Act now makes clear that employers can prohibit possession or use of marijuana during work hours or on the premises of the workplace outside of work hours. Additionally, the Act does not require an employer to take action that would cause the employer to be in violation of federal law, lose a licensing-related benefit, or lose a federal contract or funding.

Action Items

  1. Have employment handbooks and substance abuse policies updated consistent with the new law.
  2. Update drug testing procedures for notice requirements and protections.
  3. Have managers trained on recognizing signs of impairment and how to handle workplace substance abuse.
  4. Subscribers can call our HR On-Call Hotline at (888) 378-2456 for further assistance.

Disclaimer: This document is designed to provide general information and guidance concerning employment-related issues. It is presented with the understanding that ManagEase is not engaged in rendering any legal opinions. If a legal opinion is needed, please contact the services of your own legal adviser.

© 2019 ManagEase

Massachusetts: Denying Lateral Transfer May be Considered Discriminatory

APPLIES TO

All Employers with MA Employees

EFFECTIVE

January 29, 2019

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

In Yee v. Massachusetts State Police, the state Supreme Judicial Court stated that by not granting Yee, a self-identified Chinese Asian-American, a lateral transfer from one Troop to another in the State Police, while granting the same transfer to Caucasian employees, his employer caused an “adverse employment action.” Specifically, Yee claimed the transfer would have afforded him additional opportunities for compensation for working overtime and on details. The Court stated that an adverse employment action is not limited to denial of a promotion, but includes a material difference in the terms, conditions, or privileges of employment.

Read more