A bill introduced in the California Assembly in February 2022 would prohibit employers from discriminating against workers and job applicants for off-duty marijuana use.

Assembly Bill (AB) 2188 would amend the Fair Employment and Housing Act to make it unlawful for employers to discriminate against job applicants or employees for the “use of cannabis off the job and away from the workplace.” It also would prevent discrimination against applicants or employees that fail drug tests detecting “nonpsychoactive cannabis metabolites in their urine, hair, or bodily fluids.” But, it would not permit employees “to be impaired by, or to use cannabis on the job.” AB 2188 also includes carveouts for building and construction trades employees, federal contractors, federal funding recipients, or federal licensees required to maintain drug-free workplaces.

AB 2188 would add to the current body of laws legalizing and regulating marijuana use in the Golden State. Indeed, Proposition 215 legalized the medical use of cannabis in 1996, while in 2016, Proposition 64 did so for recreational marijuana.

While the enactment of Prop. 64 represents a victory for recreational marijuana advocates, the legislation does not include language prohibiting employers from discriminating against employees for off-work recreational marijuana use. To the contrary, it expressly provides that employers will not be required to accommodate an employee’s use of marijuana. The legislative initiative stated that its purpose and intent were, among other things, to “[a]llow public and private employers to enact and enforce workplace policies pertaining to marijuana.”

Current cannabis regulations are consistent with the California Supreme Court’s holding in Ross v. Ragingwire Telecommunications, Inc. In that case the court examined the conflict between California’s Compassionate Use Act (which gives a person who uses marijuana for medical purposes on a physician’s recommendation a defense to certain state criminal charges and permission to possess the drug) and federal law (which prohibits the drug’s possession, even by medical users). The court held that the Compassionate Use Act did not intend to address the rights and obligation of employers and employees, and further noted that the possession and use of marijuana could not be a protected activity because it is still illegal under federal law.

AB 2188 is and reflects a further effort by some to legalize and regulate the non-medical use of marijuana. As of 2021, 18 states and a number of territories had enacted laws to regulate cannabis for adult non-medical use. While in the employment context, certain states have moved to grant employees some level of protection for medical use, others extended protection for non-medical use. Employers are prohibited from taking adverse action against workers or applicants’ recreational use in Montana, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, and soon, Connecticut.

AB 2188 passed the Assembly May 26 and was read in the Senate for the first time May 27. If it makes it to the governor’s desk, he will have until Sept. 30, 2022, to sign or veto it.

Print:
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Photo of Adam Bouka Adam Bouka

Adam Bouka is a Labor & Employment attorney in Greenberg Traurig’s San Francisco office. Adam counsels employers on matters arising from hiring, termination, employee leave, compensation and benefits, employee handbooks, safety (including workplace violence restraining orders), policies and procedures, and COVID-19 related issues.

Adam Bouka is a Labor & Employment attorney in Greenberg Traurig’s San Francisco office. Adam counsels employers on matters arising from hiring, termination, employee leave, compensation and benefits, employee handbooks, safety (including workplace violence restraining orders), policies and procedures, and COVID-19 related issues. He also assists with drafting and updating related materials.

Adam represents employers in state and federal court litigation involving employment discrimination, breach of contract, unfair competition and trade secrets, wage and hour, wrongful discharge, sexual harassment, and workplace violence.

Photo of Charles O. Thompson Charles O. Thompson

Charles Thompson serves as the Co-Chair of the firm’s Labor & Employment Wage & Hour Class and Collective Action Litigation group. He focuses his practice on employment litigation and counseling representing clients through all phases of Class Actions and Single Plaintiff cases. Charles

Charles Thompson serves as the Co-Chair of the firm’s Labor & Employment Wage & Hour Class and Collective Action Litigation group. He focuses his practice on employment litigation and counseling representing clients through all phases of Class Actions and Single Plaintiff cases. Charles has wide-ranging experience litigating employment-related issues for public and private companies, having handled over 1,000 employment matters for clients ranging from Fortune 500 companies to Silicon Valley startups. He has tried employment, commercial, and professional liability cases to verdict and directed verdict, has litigated and appealed cases from California State Courts to the United States Supreme Court, and is a Fellow of the prestigious College of Labor and Employment Lawyers.

Charles represents employers in wage and hour cases, as well as EEOC class actions, in state and federal courts across the United States and has broad experience appearing before the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing, the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement, the Employment Development Department, and the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and the Department of Labor.

In addition to his trial and counseling work, Charles serves as a private and judicial mediator and arbitrator, and has acted as a pro-tem judge upon request of the court. He has broad experience in binding arbitrations and trial. He has taught trial advocacy, diversity, employment and substance abuse to clients and industry organizations.

Throughout his career, Charles has been a champion for diversity and has served on the Executive Committee of the board of Directors for the Justice & Diversity Center of The Bar Association of San Francisco. He actively supports and promotes diversity efforts and collaborates with clients on diversity issues.