FT 12.16 – Drug Screening Reform Act (Awaiting signature)

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

This is based on a recent bill passed in Nevada.  Under federal and regional law, marijuana is legal, therefore it makes no sense to deny employment to people on the basis of having marijuana in their system, provided that using cannabis does not impair a worker's performance on the job.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

The provisions of this bill were directly taken from the original Nevada law, but I do notice the ambiguities.  I am not sure how these provisions would be interpreted by Nevada law, but I will amend to strike them for clarity's sake:

AN ACT
Relating to employment; prohibiting the denial of employment due to the presence of marijuana in a screening test taken by a prospective employee with certain exceptions; authorizing an employee to rebut the results of a screening test under certain  circumstances; and providing other matters properly relating thereto.

Section 1: Title

This legislation may be cited as the Drug Screenings Reform Act.

Section 2.

Except as otherwise specifically provided by law:

1. It is unlawful for any employer in this Commonwealth to fail or refuse to hire a  prospective employee because the prospective employee submitted to a screening  test  and  the results of the screening test indicate the presence of marijuana.

2. The provisions of subsection 1 do not apply if the prospective employee is applying for a position:

(a) As a firefighter

(b) As an emergency medical technician

(c) That requires an employee to operate a motor vehicle and for which  federal or state law  requires the employee to submit to screening tests; or

(d) That, in the determination of the employer, could adversely affect the safety of others.

3. If an employer requires an employee to submit to a screening test within the first 30 days of employment, the employee shall have the right to submit to an additional screening test, at his
or  her  own  expense,  to  rebut  the  results  of  the  initial  screening test.  The employer shall accept and give appropriate consideration to the results of such a screening test.

Section 3: Exceptions

The provisions of this section do not apply:

(a) To the extent that they are inconsistent or otherwise in conflict with the provisions of an   employment contract or collective bargaining agreement.

(b)(a) To the extent that they are inconsistent or otherwise in conflict with the provisions of federal law.

(c)(b) To a position of employment funded by a federal grant.

Section 4: Definition of "screening test"

1. As used in this section, “screening test” means a test of a person’s blood, urine, hair or saliva to detect the general presence of a controlled substance or any other drug.

Section 5: Enactment

1. This act becomes effective on January 1, 2020.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

I don't think striking that part from 2.3 clears it up.  What is the purpose of the additional screening test?  If it's free of drugs, does that mean the employer has to ignore the earlier test?

Well, obviously there are other drugs that could be tested for that employers would, for good reason, not want their workers using (i.e. meth and heroin).  Although since we've legalized a slough of other drugs, it's worth considering whether these should be covered under this bill, too.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

I don't think striking that part from 2.3 clears it up.  What is the purpose of the additional screening test?  If it's free of drugs, does that mean the employer has to ignore the earlier test?

Well, obviously there are other drugs that could be tested for that employers would, for good reason, not want their workers using (i.e. meth and heroin).  Although since we've legalized a slough of other drugs, it's worth considering whether these should be covered under this bill, too.

I'm not sure how that's relevant to what I was asking

I am explaining why employers might want to conduct different screening tests, for drugs other than cannabis.

Since the original language is still unclear, I'll amend to strike Section 2.3 entirely.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

Aye.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

AN ACT
Relating to employment; prohibiting the denial of employment due to the presence of marijuana in a screening test taken by a prospective employee with certain exceptions; authorizing an employee to rebut the results of a screening test under certain  circumstances; and providing other matters properly relating thereto.

Section 1: Title & Definitions

1. This legislation may be cited as the Drug Screenings Reform Act.
2. As used in this Act, “screening test” means a test of a person’s blood, urine, hair or saliva to detect the general presence of a controlled substance or any other drug.

Section 2.

Except as otherwise specifically provided by law:

1. It is unlawful for any employer in this Commonwealth to fail or refuse to hire a  prospective employee because the prospective employee submitted to a screening  test  and  the results of the screening test indicate the presence of marijuana.

2. The provisions of subsection 1 do not apply if the prospective employee is applying for a position:

(a) As a firefighter

(b) As an emergency medical technician

(c) That requires an employee to operate a motor vehicle and for which  federal or state law  requires the employee to submit to screening tests; or

(d) That, in the determination of the employer, could adversely affect the safety of others.

Section 3: Exceptions

The provisions of this Act do not apply:

(a) To the extent that they are inconsistent or otherwise in conflict with the provisions of federal law.

(b) To a position of employment funded by a federal grant.

Section 4: Enactment

1. This act becomes effective on January 1, 2020.