Sam Levin's post about business groups urging the federal government toclamp down on Amendment 64
collected plenty of views and comments. Among those weighing in was marijuana advocate and A64 opponent Kathleen Chippi, who warns that the measure doesn't prohibit drug testing -- and predicts terrible repercussions for employees.
If you like this story, consider signing up for our email newsletters.
SHOW ME HOW
You have successfully signed up for your selected newsletter(s) - please keep an eye on your mailbox, we're movin' in!
A64 Section 6 a and d clearly grants the employer the right to continue to drug test and fire employes over a failed tests -- which shows that the "business community" has also not even read A64 --DA-- They are the ones who got RIGHTS granted under 64 -- not the pot smokers. They preserved the right to FIRE employee's over marijuana use, yes, even use away from work, enshrined into our constitution.
And the Beinor ruling is the current law of the land on this issue -- employee's lawfully fired over marijuana use (MMJ or MJ) will NOT receive unemployment compensation for their lawful firing over the use of illegal drugs -- be it on the job or on a Friday night party away from work.
For more memorable takes, visit our Comment of the Day archive.