Adults who drink alcohol legally outside work aren’t penalized. It should be no different for marijuana.
Unfortunately, antiquated and discriminatory drug testing
policies often haven’t kept up with these changes.
It’s reasonable for employers to expect sobriety on the
job. But requiring would-be hires and employees to undergo urine screens
for past cannabis exposure are invasive and ineffective. They
neither identify workers who may be under the influence nor contribute to a
safe work environment.
That’s because conventional urine tests only identify the
presence of non-psychoactive “metabolites” — by-products that linger in the
body’s blood and urine well after a substance’s mood-altering
effects have ended.
Even the U.S. Department of Justice acknowledges: “A positive test result, even
when confirmed, only indicates that a particular substance is present in the
test subject’s body tissue. It does not indicate abuse or addiction; recency,
frequency, or amount of use; or impairment.”
Carboxy THC, marijuana’s primary metabolite, is fat-soluble and can remain detectable in urine for days, weeks, or even months after a person has stopped using cannabis. It doesn’t provide any definitive information about how often an employee uses cannabis, when they last consumed it, or whether they were under the influence when they took the test.
Aside from these practical limitations, there are larger
philosophical questions raised by random workplace cannabis testing —
especially in jurisdictions where the possession and use of marijuana is
now legal under state law.
Studies indicate that employees
who consume cannabis during their off hours are little different from their
peers. Their workplace performance seldom differs from their co-workers, many
of whom consume alcohol, and they
don’t pose any increased safety risk.
According to an exhaustive review by the U.S. National
Academy of Sciences, “There is no evidence to support a statistical
association between cannabis use and occupational accidents or injuries.”
This begs the question: Why are we okay with policies
that single marijuana users out and discriminate against them?
Fortunately, in a growing number of jurisdictions, lawmakers
are doing away these outdated and discriminatory policies.
The District of Columbia plus California, Connecticut, Montana, New Jersey, New York, and Rhode Island — as well as major corporations like Amazon — have amended their
rules so that many employees are no longer terminated from their jobs solely because
of a positive drug test for THC metabolites.
The states of Michigan, Nevada, and Washington — along with local
governments in Atlanta, Baltimore, Philadelphia, and elsewhere — have also
enacted laws prohibiting certain employers from taking action against new hires
because of a failed drug test for marijuana.
Lawmakers in other states and localities should follow
suit and amend workplace cannabis testing regulations in accordance with the
plant’s rapidly changing cultural and legal status.
Those who consume alcohol legally and responsibly while away from their jobs aren’t punished by their employers unless their work performance is adversely impacted. Those who legally consume cannabis should be held to a similar standard.
Paul Armentano is the Deputy Director
for NORML, the National Organization for
the Reform of Marijuana Laws. This op-ed was distributed by OtherWords.org.
