Legal Medical Marijuana States and DC <\/a> <\/p>\n\n\n\nCities: <\/p>\n\n\n\n
City of Columbia, Missouri – Ordinance states that seriously ill adults who obtain and use marijuana and\/or marijuana paraphernalia for medicinal purposes pursuant to the recommendation of a physician shall not be subject to arrest, prosecution, punishment or sanction. This ordinance is therefore arguably applicable to workplace sanctions after a positive drug test result due to the medicinal use of marijuana. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
City of Ann Arbor, Michigan – Ordinance refers to medical marijuana but it does not relate to workplace drug testing. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
City of Detroit, Michigan – Ordinance refers to medical marijuana but it does not relate to workplace drug testing. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
City of Ferndale, Michigan – Ordinance refers to medical marijuana but it does not relate to workplace drug testing. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
City of Flint, Michigan – Ordinance refers to medical but it does not relate to workplace drug testing; March 4, 2007 ordinance permits patients to have access to medical marijuana. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Traverse City, Michigan – Ordinance refers to medical marijuana but it does not relate to workplace drug testing. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
The following California cities have adopted medical marijuana guidelines: 1) City of Arcata, 2) City of Berkeley, 3) City of Oakland, 4) City of San Diego, 5) City of San Jose, 6) City of Santa Cruz, 7) City of Santa Rosa, and 7) City of Sebastopol. A number of additional California counties regulate medical marijuana cultivation and possession in some form or fashion. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
This Standard Operating Procedure will be amended should other states pass legislation or city ordinances on this subject.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
iii) When reviewing a case where the donor asserts the medical marijuana defense in a state that has an existing statute or ordinance, the individual requirements of each of the state laws or city ordinances will be followed along with the Sample MRO prescription verification process to the extent the prescription verification applies in a particular state. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
iv) Specifically, where a state issues a registry card to participants in a medical marijuana program, a copy of the donor’s current registry card will be requested. If the registry card is current and compliant with the individual state’s statutory requirements it will be accepted as a reasonable medical explanation. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
v) In a state in which written documentation is required such documentation must be compliant with the individual state’s statutory or individual city’s requirements and verified by the Medical Review Officer. Such verification must be obtained in writing from the physician or practitioner authorizing the use of the medical marijuana. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
vi) Absent any of the foregoing required documentation, the result will be reported as verified positive. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
b) Written Employer Policy, Employer Election or direction on Medical Marijuana Explanations on Record Instructing the Sample MRO Medical Review Officer to report a positive laboratory drug test result for marijuana as a verified positive if the donor alleges the use of medical marijuana. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
i) If there is a written employer election, direction or policy on record with Sample MRO Medical Review instructing the Sample MRO Medical Review Officer to report a positive laboratory drug test result for marijuana as a verified positive if the donor alleges the use of marijuana for medical reasons, the Sample MRO Medical Review Officer will not continue the interview with the donor or conduct a further medical\/legal review to determine whether the donor\u2019s claim of alleged use is consistent with a particular state medical marijuana law or ordinance. Instead, the donor will be informed of the employer’s policy and the result will be reported as positive with notice to the Designated Employer Representative (DER) for the reason. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Marinol Explanation Procedure: <\/p>\n\n\n\n
The authorized use of Marinol will be considered a reasonable medical explanation for a positive laboratory drug test for marijuana. The Sample MRO Medical Review Officer will verify the donor\u2019s explanation as the MRO verifies all prescription explanations. This procedure applies to both mandated (DOT or DHSS) and non-mandated tests. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Hemp Explanation Procedure: <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Consistent with federal policy, consuming a hemp food product, or the use of a hemp product (examples: lotions, shampoos), will not be considered a legitimate medical explanation for a prohibited substance or metabolite in an individual\u2019s specimen. When a specimen is positive for marijuana and the donor claims hemp ingestion or use, the test will be reported as a verified positive. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Policy Suggestions: <\/p>\n\n\n\n
The following two alternative policy language suggestions are provided as a courtesy for your consideration. The suggestions are notoffered as legal advice but are instead offered for informational purposes. Sample MRO is not a law firm and does not offer legal advice. It is therefore not intended as a substitute for the legal advice of an attorney knowledgeable of the user\u2019s individual circumstances. Sample MRO makes no assurances regarding the accuracy, completeness, currency or utility of the following information. Legislative, regulatory and case law developments regularly impact general research.<\/em> <\/p>\n\n\n\nIt is strongly recommended that you consult with your legal counsel prior to adopting either of the following policy language suggestions to confirm that the language is consistent with your organization’s position on medical marijuana use. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Drug Free Workplace Policy Language 1: <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Medical Marijuana explanation accepted if use is consistent with state law, regulations, or ordinances: <\/p>\n\n\n\n
The use of marijuana for medical purposes ordinance will be considered an acceptable explanation or excuse for a confirmed positive laboratory test for marijuana in those states or cities that permit the use of medical marijuana under state law or ordinance. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Sample MRO Medical Review will follow the following procedures before accepting a medical marijuana explanation or excuse for a laboratory confirmed positive test result for marijuana: <\/p>\n\n\n\n
i) When reviewing a case where the donor asserts the medical marijuana defense in a state that has an existing statute\/regulation, or ordinance, the individual requirements of each of the state laws\/regulations or city ordinance will be followed along with the Sample MRO prescription verification process to the extent the prescription verification applies in a particular state. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
ii) Specifically, where a state issues a registry card to participants in a medical marijuana program, a copy of the donor’s current registry card will be requested. If the registry card is current and compliant with the individual state’s statutory requirements it will be accepted as a reasonable medical explanation and the test result will be verified and reported as a negative test result. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
iii) In a state in which written documentation is required such documentation must be compliant with the individual state’s statutory or individual city’s requirements and verified by the Medical Review Officer. Such verification must be obtained in writing from the physician or practitioner authorizing the use of the medical marijuana. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Absent any of the foregoing required documentation, the result will be reported as verified positive. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Drug Free Workplace Policy Language 2:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Medical Marijuana not accepted as an explanation even where permitted by state law, regulation or ordinance:<\/strong> <\/p>\n\n\n\nThe use of marijuana for medical purposes, even if permitted by state law, regulation or ordinance, will not be considered an acceptable explanation for a confirmed positive laboratory report for marijuana and will be reported by the Medical Review Officer as a verified positive drug test for marijuana. Procedurally, the Sample MRO Medical Review Officer will not continue an interview with the donor or conduct a further medical\/legal review to determine whether the donor\u2019s claim of alleged use is consistent with a particular state medical marijuana law or ordinance if the donor claims his or her use is authorized by a medical marijuana law. Instead,<\/strong> the donor will be informed that the employer’s policy is to not accept a medical marijuana explanation and that the MRO will report the result as positive with notice to the DER for the reason.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\nHowever, state law, regulations and ordinance requirements\/limitations will be followed and a reasonable accommodation analysis will be conducted as applicable or as required by the federal Americans with Disabilities Law and any applicable state law, regulation, ordinance or case law\/administrative decision precedent.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
…EXHIBIT A: MEDICAL MARIJUANA POLICY MRO Sample Standard Operating Procedures on Medical Marijuana, Marinol and Hemp Because Sample MRO believes that legal and regulatory compliance is a critically important component of your workplace substance abuse testing program, we would like to take this opportunity to update you on your policy regarding medical marijuana and hemp […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":12,"featured_media":51740,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_seopress_robots_primary_cat":"none","_relevanssi_hide_post":"","_relevanssi_hide_content":"","_relevanssi_pin_for_all":"","_relevanssi_pin_keywords":"","_relevanssi_unpin_keywords":"","_relevanssi_related_keywords":"","_relevanssi_related_include_ids":"","_relevanssi_related_exclude_ids":"","_relevanssi_related_no_append":"","_relevanssi_related_not_related":"","_relevanssi_related_posts":"55058,51283,51274,50863,50890,51045","_relevanssi_noindex_reason":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[48],"tags":[],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nationaldrugscreening.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/50876"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nationaldrugscreening.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nationaldrugscreening.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nationaldrugscreening.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/12"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nationaldrugscreening.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=50876"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.nationaldrugscreening.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/50876\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nationaldrugscreening.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/51740"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nationaldrugscreening.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=50876"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nationaldrugscreening.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=50876"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nationaldrugscreening.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=50876"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}