Jobless pay OK for people fired for medical pot

Skylor

Skylor

Well-Known Member
http://www.abc12.com/story/26888523/jobless-pay-ok-for-people-fired-for-medical-pot

Awesome, for once common sense prevails....I wonder if our AG will try to appeal this 3-0 ruling, lol (i bet hes tick right now, ha ha)

............................................................................
DETROIT (AP) - The Michigan appeals court says workers can qualify for unemployment pay if they're fired for using medical marijuana.

In a 3-0 decision Friday, the court ruled in favor of a hi-lo operator, a hospital employee and a furniture repairman. The court says there was no evidence that they used marijuana at work or that they had worked while under the influence of pot.

Rick Braska, Jenine Kemp and Stephen Kudzia were fired after drug tests. All had medical marijuana cards. The use of marijuana to alleviate certain ailments was approved by voters.

The attorney general's office claims the law protects people from criminal prosecutions, not from adverse rulings in civil disputes such as jobless pay.

But the appeals court disagreed, saying the 2008 marijuana law can trump other laws.
 
Skylor

Skylor

Well-Known Member
alcohol said:
in your face bill schuette
Click to expand...
Its pretty bad when U appeal a ruling and it comes back 3-0, not one judge agreed with how you viewed the law and your arguments.

And he has his gull to say he defends the state constitution (no link but it was in one of his TV ads for re election) Yeah maybe but just the parts that he also agrees with.

I love my right to Free Speech and respect it. I don't like the KKK and what they say, how one race is superior to the rest, thats total BS, wasn't for Asia, we might not have computers like we do today. White people have done alot but so have other races throughout history. Today nobody ever gives thanks to the slaves the USA were using up to 150 years ago. Wasn't for that dirt cheap labor the south had for so many years, the USA might have been broken up into two or more countries or Canada-Mexico might have purchased some of the USA land for their own country and the USA would have had to sell it to raise money to get by on.

I don't like at all what the KKK stands for and what it says but I do support their right to say what they feel like. Living in a place that has Free Speech, means sometimes U will hear things that U do not like, its the price one pays for being truly free.

If our AG had it his way, he would step on many peoples rights and not care one bit,
 
Last edited:
Dr. Bob

Dr. Bob

Well-Known Member
This is a good start. Used to be they could just fire without consequences. Now they will take a hit on their unemployment insurance. As an employer, I can tell you it makes a difference, perhaps now that there is a cost employers will be a little more tolerant of medical marijuana.

Unfortunately the ADA covers conditions, not treatments. I believe that has already had a ruling. So suing probably won't work out well, but it is your nickel.

Dr. Bob
 
GregS

GregS

Well-Known Member
I'm not talking about the ADA, which holds that cannabis is illegal and its use not protected, but the Michigan Persons With Disabilities Act of 1976 that protects us at the state level. What ruling are you talking about?
 
Dr. Bob

Dr. Bob

Well-Known Member
Not sure on that one, but I suspect it is similar. In general you have to make accommodations for conditions, not the treatment of those conditions. Why don't you research it a bit and come back and tell us how you think the medical use of cannabis is covered? Might be an interesting and informative discussion.

Dr. Bob
 
howsitgrowin420

howsitgrowin420

Well-Known Member
Dr. Bob said:
In fact, here is a legal expert to start the discussion...

http://www.brownlawgroup.com/newsletter-archives/medical-marijuana-use-though-permitted-by-california-doctors-not-permitted-in-workplace-or-protected-by-ada/

amongst other points, there are disclaimers for illegal drugs, but I'll let you go through it.

Dr. Bob
Click to expand...
Dr.....as in chiropractor? I wouldn't expect a PhD to post an article like that....no author, no date, no sources...furthermore it is from a .com as in commercial and for profit. Maybe an M.D. would use sources like that, but not a PhD. Lastly, leave it to a doctor to trust the word of an attorney.

****NOTE: when trying to use articles to tell someone to do some 'research', make sure you include something that would be considered "research" in even the loosest of circles.********

Hope Beth's driving improves.
 
Dr. Bob

Dr. Bob

Well-Known Member
Just out of curiosity, who would you rather hear from on a legal issue, an attorney or some yahoo in a forum?
howsitgrowin420 said:
Dr.....as in chiropractor? I wouldn't expect a PhD to post an article like that....no author, no date, no sources...furthermore it is from a .com as in commercial and for profit. Maybe an M.D. would use sources like that, but not a PhD. Lastly, leave it to a doctor to trust the word of an attorney.

****NOTE: when trying to use articles to tell someone to do some 'research', make sure you include something that would be considered "research" in even the loosest of circles.********

Hope Beth's driving improves.
Click to expand...
She is doing great, thanks!
 
GregS

GregS

Well-Known Member
The ADA is not the best solution to cannabis defenses in Michigan. Just drop it. It is a federal law that omits cannabis use as a reasonable accommodation. The Michigan Persons' With Disabilitites, OTOH, PA 202 of 1976 carries more water for these and others who have been discriminated against. The ADA, Title 2, may well work, along with Sec. 1983 of the federal code for other pertinent issues, for instance police misconduct against disabled individuals, but it is only a part of disability law that, in this instance, may very well hold a back seat to the laws of the State of Michigan, which are obviously intended to accommodate us for our disabilities in our use of cannabis.
 
Dr. Bob

Dr. Bob

Well-Known Member
Section 1983? Violation of federal civil rights under the color of authority has some bearing on the issue of being fired for testing positive for marijuana? Do tell...
 
Dr. Bob

Dr. Bob

Well-Known Member
Well stick up a link to the Michigan statute you are referring to and discuss the sections you think might come into play. This sounds like an interesting and a refreshing approach.
 
howsitgrowin420

howsitgrowin420

Well-Known Member
Dr. Bob said:
You do realize that a judge is just a lawyer in a robe, right?
Click to expand...
Wow, so it must follow that all lawyers in robes are judges. Wrong. Douchebag attorneys are a dime a dozen and their opinions do not mean anything. The opinion of a judge goes on to impact how laws are interpreted in the future. Must be some robe. If all judges were money grubbers then doctors and judges would go hand in hand.
 
GregS

GregS

Well-Known Member
This is a good place to start regarding the ADA in terms of government, to include police, intrusion on the rights of disabled individuals on the Federal level. It does not cover cannabis use as legitimate treatment, but does require reasonable accommodation against injurious physical harm in arrest and custody situations: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=998036

Then there is the Michigan Persons With Disabilities Civil Rights Act, PA 202 of 1976. It is clear that this State law does protect us in our use of cannabis. I am in a conversation with a happenin' attorney who came to me to express an interest in the issues: https://www.michigan.gov/documents/PWDCRA10-05_115444_7.pdf
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top