Cristina Barbuto a Massachusetts resident who protested the manner in which her company fired her from a job for using marijuana which was obtained for medicinal purposes related to Crohn’s disease. She filed a lawsuit against her employer claiming that she had earlier informed her employer during the hiring process that she had attained approval from her physician to buy marijuana under the state’s recently passed medical marijuana law. The claimant said that the drugs would help her manage the symptoms of Crohn’s disease and track her weight (Descheneux, 2015). Barbuto claimed that she never partake in marijuana before and while working. She had informed her employer that she would test positive for marijuana but one her first day at work she tested positive for the drug and was relieved of her duties. She complained to the human resource representative, she was told that the company was national therefore it followed federal rather than state laws. Use and possession of marijuana is a contravention of federal law but it is allowed in 23 states for medicinal uses. However, this raises the question of drug testing in the specific states. If clean drug tests is a requirement for employment are they conditioned to forego drug testing? The lawsuit raised several legal arguments; one, Barbuto claimed that the utilization of marijuana is safeguarded under the medical marijuana laws. A section of that law states that any individual meeting criteria under the law shall not be punished for such actions. Barbuto claims that she was denied advantage under the section of the law. The second legal argument is that she was violated under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the state’s nondiscrimination law (Deschenaux, 2015). The law entitled her to accommodation for her medical condition hence allowing her to test positive for marijuana. The other argument is that firing her was a discharge in disregard of public policy although it differs from the at-will employment doctrine.
The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) became law in the 1990 and restricts discrimination against individuals with disabilities in all spheres of life. ADA guarantees the people with disabilities are granted accommodations in employment, transportation, state and local governmental services. The Americans with Disabilities Act Amendments Act (ADAAA) was put into effect in 2009 (National Network, 2018). The ADAAA made key alterations to the definition of disability, or is recorded to have such impairment. According to the law, concentrating, thinking and reading are considered major life events. Burton was suffering from crohn’s disease an incurable condition characterized by inflammation of the bowels in the lining of the digestive tract. Some of the life-altering symptoms of crohn’s include weight loss, diarrhea, abdominal pain, anemia and fatigue. A disability is defined a physical or mental impairment that limits a key life activity; chron’s disease is a physical impairment that affects the digestive system and can severely affect an individual’s ability to eat and dispose bodily waste. The condition’s symptoms fluctuate frequently and might affect productivity. The Crohn’s and Colitis Foundation of America and the Digestive Disease National Condition noted that half of the individuals affected by crohn’s miss about 26 days of work per year. An individual affected by Crohn’s therefore qualifies for reasonable accommodation from the employer. Burton qualified to receive some accommodations from the employer which included no drug tests or allowing her to test positive for marijuana use since that helped her manage the symptoms of the disease.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) decided a settlement in 2013 in an inequality lawsuit against the University of Maryland Faculty Physicians, Inc. the institution was required to award $92, 500 to an employee of the institution who was suffering from Crohn’s disease and requested for an additional day of medical leave (Rothschild, 2013). EEOC reasoned that giving her the one day extension was a reasonable accommodation and her termination according to the company’s attendance policy disregarded the ADA and ADAAA since it failed to provide special case exceptions to the attendance policy as reasonable accommodation for employees with disabilities. In the case, the EEOC maintained that it is an advisable business practice to give reasonable accommodations that authorize employees maintain their jobs as necessitated by Federal law. Conclusively; Crohn’s is a disease that causing a physical impairment of the digestive system and qualifies as a disability under the ADA and newly amended ADAAA. Burton was therefore qualified for reasonable accommodations from her employer in terms of avoiding drug testing or allowing her to test positive for marijuana, a product that helped managed her condition. The ADAAA does not mandate the use of illegal drugs as an accommodation but state laws stipulate that it is safe to use ,marijuana for medicinal purposes (Koban, 2017).
The Irvine, Calif-based Advantage Sales and Marketing Company argued that since it was a national company it followed federal laws rather than state laws. State laws are laws for each specific state and are applicable to the said state. The state law appertains to residents, visitors, business, corporations or any organizations operating in the state. Federal laws on the other hand are operational at the national level and pertain to the whole nation. Whenever a state law is in disagreement with federal laws; the federal law triumphs. The state law regarding marijuana uses in the state of Massachusetts is Mass General Laws, Chapter 94c 321 (M.G.L Ch 94C-32L-32N) has legitimized medical marijuana utilization and recreational use (Koban, 2017). The law stipulates that anyone who meets the requirements will not be punished under Massachusetts law or discriminated against for such actions. The federal laws related to the Burton case include ADA Amendments Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-325) that regulates reasonable accommodations for people with disability (National Network, 2018). The Controlled Substances Act (CSA) (21 U.S.C.-811) that regulates the possession and utilization of marijuana (Americans for Safe Access, 2018). The company is obligated to follow Massachusetts state laws on Marijuana which allow its utilization for medicinal purposes however the federal law that categorizes Marijuana as a schedule 1 drug and restricts its use tramps on the state law. Therefore the company was within its rights to invoke the state law. The Coats v. Dish Network was a case recently heard in the Colorado Supreme Court; an employee of the Dish Network was sued under the Colorado’s lawful off-duty activities law after being fired after a random drug test despite possessing a medical marijuana license (Atterberry, 2015). The unanimous court ruling was favorable for the company based on the fact that the federal law still categorize marijuana as a controlled substance. The decision in the case demonstrates that the company’s decision was valid. The 2011 case of James v. City of Costa Mesa was a case ruled by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on the application of ADA to medical marijuana (Miller, 2018). The court ruled that medical marijuana utilization is not safeguarded under the ADAAA; although the doctor recommended marijuana use under state law it was prohibited under the federal laws.
Reasonable accommodations are adaptations made to the way things are done to allow individuals with disabilities to have equal opportunities to participate in a job. Reasonable accommodations are therefore appropriate since the employee is tasked with responsibility of protecting its employees. Although the ADAAA does expressly allow the accommodation for marijuana; it dies require an accommodation related to the covered disability and qualifies the employee for certain protections. The employee should not be intoxicated at the workplace but an adjustment is required depending on the nature of the job and sensitivities of the duties. Employees working on the desk do not necessarily have to undergo drug tests but those in transportation might require to undergo the test due to regulations of Department of Transportation which does not allow the use of marijuana. The Burton case could be solved out of case through a conflict resolution process of collaborative practice. The process involves each party working with their own lawyer to create solutions that meet the needs of both parties. All the parties commit to working out the case without going to court and exchange information freely. The agreement made through the collaborative practice is legally binding.
References
Americans for Safe Access. (May 8, 2018). Federal Marijuana Law. Retrieved from https://www.safeaccessnow.org/federal_marijuana_law
Atterberry, R.E. (September 18, 2015). Marijuana in the Workplace: A Hazy Issue for Employers. Retrieved from https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/legal-and-compliance/employment-law/pages/marijuana-hazy-issue.aspx
Deschenaux, J. (September 21, 2015). Mass: First Workplace Medical Marijuana Lawsuit Filed. Retrieved from https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/legal-and-compliance/state-and-local-updates/pages/mass-medical-marijuana-lawsuit.aspx
Koban, T. (February 7, 2017). The New Massachusetts Marijuana Law- What is Legal?. Retrieved from http://www.kobanlaw.com/massachusetts-marijuana-law/
Miller, K. (March 9, 2018). The Americans with Disabilities Act and Medical Marijuana. Retrieved from http://www.currentcompliance.org/2018/03/09/ada-medical-marijuana/
National Network (Information, Guidance and Training on the Americans with Disabilities Act). (2018). What is the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)? Retrieved from https://adata.org/learn-about-ada
Rothschild, F. (February 20, 2013). EEOC Settles Case of Employee with Crohn’s Disease Fired for Asking for an Additional Day of Medical Leave. Retrieved from https://employmentdiscrimination.foxrothschild.com/2013/02/articles/us-eeoc/eeoc-settles-case-of-employee-with-crohns-disease-fired-for-asking-for-an-additional-day-of-medical-leave/
