Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: nickcarraway
According to this proposition, employers cannot test an employee for drugs. If this passes, who will want to use an airport in California?

Somehow I doubt the law supersedes federal law in this case.

9 posted on 11/01/2010 10:18:17 PM PDT by xjcsa (Ridiculing the ridiculous since the day I was born.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]


To: xjcsa

It doesn’t. But there will be tons of lawsuits, before things get sorted out.


12 posted on 11/01/2010 10:29:32 PM PDT by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: xjcsa

Well, California is one of the States which has passed very strict laws as to the ability of private employers to drug test employees. Therefore, it would seem to indicate that a private employer would end up responsible for damages for any ‘accident’ that occurred while the employee is under the influence. Or, he would be libel to a law suit if he tried to fire or remove an employee whom he thinks is under the influence. Kind of a catch 22!


19 posted on 11/01/2010 10:58:09 PM PDT by Ruth C (If you chose not to vote, you vote for the most liberal candidates in CA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: xjcsa

“Somehow I doubt the law supersedes federal law in this case.”

Federal law does not allow medical marijuana, either, but the Feds turn a blind eye to it. They do a couple of arrests a year. We have “pot clubs” by the dozens in all of our larger cities.


20 posted on 11/01/2010 11:06:40 PM PDT by Persevero (Homeschooling for Excellence since 1992)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson