| Summary: In an opinion dated January 10, 2023, a Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas judge addressed the question of what constitutes being "under the influence" for purposes of the Pennsylvania Medical Marijuana Act (Act)'s safety exception.
The Pennsylvania Medical Marijuana Act (Act) prohibits employment discrimination against employees who use medical marijuana. When the Act was passed, the legislature included a safety exception within Sections 510(3) & (4) of the Act, stating that employers may prohibit employees from performing any task or duty which:
- the employer deems life-threatening, to either the employee or any of the employees of the employer, while under the influence of medical marijuana; or
- could result in a public health or safety risk while under the influence of medical marijuana.
However, the term "under the influence" was not formally defined in relation to these provisions. Relying on the decisions in Commonwealth v. Dabney (Pa. Super. 2022) and Commonwealth v. Haney (Pa. Super. 2022), Judge Wright dismissed the suit. The judge contended that the lawful use of medical marijuana cannot include permitting employees to direct drivers through construction zones as a matter of general safety. Ultimately, it was the finding of the court that "to construe 'under the influence' to mean anything other than having any amount of marijuana in a Patient-Employee's system would be altogether untenable" as related to the Act's safety exception.
|
| Impact(s): Pennsylvania employers |
