Connect with us

One-Hit Wonders

Court upholds firing of marijuana cardholders discharged after positive weed test

Published

on


Oklahoma and Arkansas medical marijuana laws

Oklahoma and Arkansas have enacted medical marijuana laws with similar features. In Oklahoma, an individual may qualify for a state medical marijuana license permitting them to purchase and use medical marijuana. In Arkansas, “qualifying patients” may receive a registry identification card allowing medical marijuana use. Like Oklahoma, employers in Arkansas are prohibited from discriminating against an applicant or employee based upon their past or present status as medical marijuana license holder. Under the laws in both states, employers retain the ability to apply and enforce drug testing programs, including those that test for marijuana.

The medical marijuana laws in both states also give employers the right to designate certain types of positions as “safety-sensitive.” In Oklahoma, a safety-sensitive position is “any job that includes tasks or duties that the employer reasonably believes could affect the safety and health of the employee performing the task or others.” Individuals holding safety-sensitive positions may be terminated by an Oklahoma or Arkansas employer for testing positive for marijuana, even if they hold an Oklahoma medical marijuana license or an Arkansas registry identification card.

Positive marijuana test at the paper mill

Bryan Prinsen and Daniel Oden worked at a paper mill in Ashdown, Arkansas. Both men held jobs that were designated as safety-sensitive at the mill, and both were qualified under Arkansas law to use medical marijuana.

The paper mill had in place a drug testing policy that included testing for marijuana. Prinsen and Oden tested positive for marijuana. According to the testing policy and their union contract, Prinsen and Oden were placed on a disciplinary suspension and signed a Last Chance Agreement. The Last Chance Agreement required certain conditions to be met before they could return to work. One of conditions required Prinsen and Oden to “produce a negative drug test.” When they were unable to satisfy the requirements of their Last Chance Agreements, Prinsen and Oden were fired.

Discharge for positive test upheld

Believing they had been unlawfully terminated, Prinsen and Oden sued the paper mill, claiming their employer had unlawfully discriminated against them based upon their protected status as medical marijuana patients. A federal court dismissed the two fired employees’ claims and upheld the paper mills’ actions.

The court’s ruling was straightforward: First, the employer had in place a drug testing policy that tested for marijuana and was compliant with state law. Second, employees like Prinsen and Oden who worked in positions reasonably designated by their employer as safety-sensitive were subject to discharge, if they tested positive for marijuana. That included safety-sensitive employees who hold marijuana registry identification cards. The court pointed out that the law’s employment protection for an individual’s status as a marijuana cardholder did not prevent an employer from taking action based on a positive marijuana test when the employee held a safety-sensitive position.

For Oklahoma employers

If this had happened in Slapout, Oklahoma, rather than Ashdown, Arkansas, the same outcome would have resulted. Under Oklahoma law, employers cannot take employment actions based solely upon an individual having a medical marijuana license. However, they can test for marijuana so long as their testing protocol follows state law. Further, if an employer has designated jobs as safety-sensitive according to Oklahoma requirements, it can discipline or fire an employee working in a safety-sensitive position who tests positive for marijuana – even if the employee holds an Oklahoma medical marijuana license.

Prinsen et al v. Domtar A.W., LLC, 4:22-cv-4076 (W.D. Ark. 1/31/23)

Court upholds firing of marijuana cardholders discharged after positive weed test



Source link

Continue Reading

One-Hit Wonders

Driving Under the Influence of Marijuana

Published

on

By


No national standard exists to determine how long someone should wait to drive after consuming marijuana. However, experts at the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment recommend waiting at least six hours after smoking less than 35 milligrams of THC and eight hours after eating or drinking something containing less than 18 milligrams.

For reference, a “typical” marijuana cigarette contains at least 60 milligrams of THC, and most edibles contain around 10 milligrams per serving size. A 12-hour wait is safer, as the high (and subsequent drowsiness) from smoking a typical amount lasts far longer.



Source link

Continue Reading

One-Hit Wonders

How can it help distressed cannabis companies today?

Published

on

By


Without the option to declare bankruptcy—due to federal illegality—the only recourse for cannabis businesses in distress to become solvent and / or distribute assets to creditors is to enter into an expensive and difficult judicial cannabis receivership. Receiverships are inherently adversarial, and the required input from third-party experts, lawyers and regular engagement with the courts can be incredibly costly.

Meanwhile, businesses operating in mainstream sectors have the ability to declare bankruptcy. This is also a court-ordered procedure that allows companies to satisfy lenders by liquidating assets, restructuring operations and finances, and to enjoy a break of sorts to make deals with creditors and renegotiate contracts and leases. Without a change to federal banking laws, cannabis companies are blocked from the benefits of bankruptcy, and the situation is only getting worse.

Given the current tight capital market environment, the increase in cannabis distressed assets, and the shortage of options to cannabis operators to address said challenges, is there a possible alternative option to alleviate the rather dire situation?

 

Genesis—Transition from Equity Financing to Debt Financing

Equity financing has been the most prominent way to raise capital in cannabis for the last several years. However,recent data collected by Viridian Capital Advisorsreveals that debt currently makes up 93% of capital raised by U.S. cannabis cultivation and retail companies, compared to 55.7% in U.S. industries overall.

This change in the capital-raising environment, which has led to an increased number of creditors in the sector, combined with continued market pressures on cannabis businesses to remain competitive, make it highly likely that the industry will inevitably see more receiverships.

Ultimately, while debt financiers are willing to lend cannabis businesses money, they expect to be paid back on time and often with high interest. If the business begins to struggle and enters a distressed phase that leads to receivership, the business assets will be sold off and the secured lenders will be the first to get paid, while the business itself is likely not to recover much.

Consider an Administrative and Collateral Agent

With receiverships punishingly expensive and the debt financing landscapebordering on predatorial, distressed cannabis businesses are desperate for any assistance or support available.  An Administrative and Collateral Agent (ACA) could be the alternative support required, benefitting borrowers, lenders and regulators alike, and offering a more cost-effective and less punitive option to courts, receivers and lawyers.

Instead of dealing with the courts and an expensive court-appointed receiver, cannabis companies seeking relief could turn to an ACA to facilitate mediation between parties and create alignment within the industry, which does not exist today.

An ACA could create a level of trust, transparency and complementary positioning with industry participants that simply has not yet existed in cannabis. The use of an ACA could challenge the competing perceptions that there is already alignment between regulators, operators and lenders, or that a useful alignment between these parties could ever exist.

An ACA could be a real and valuable tool for state governments and regulators as they begin to understand that it is in their best interests to assist cannabis businesses in their states in the face of continued federal illegality and restrictions. Under a private agreement between parties, the ACA would conduct something more akin to an administrative receivership as opposed to the traditional judicial receivership that is the only current option for insolvent cannabis businesses to seek relief.

Building upon a Cannabis Credit Rating Framework

Ideally, an ACA would work within an industry-specific credit rating system for cannabis businesses in distress in order to work within an established framework for potential investors. If cannabis companies are ranked across an equitable, systematic and formulaiccredit rating system, borrowers, lenders and regulators would benefit from the quantifiable transparency afforded by said rating, and debt financing would have an inherent regulatory-like structure to prevent predatory lending. By avoiding the courts, the distressed cannabis company would save time, money and create a more attractive scenario for potential lenders.

Initial Path to Mitigating Solutions

While the current challenges facing cannabis businesses today are well documented and have risen to both creditors and regulators attention, a viable solution has yet to be identified. Most likely no one solution exists beyond waiting for the economic and capital environments to evolve. Yet, mitigating options do exist.

The introduction of an ACA is one such option. Questions remain as to the mechanics, regulatory, operative and fiscal alike, as well as who to trust to take it on. The introduction of a credit rating framework is the first step to creating a solid foundation from within which an ACA can operate transparently and equitably. Any potential buy-in from regulators, creditors and operators remains an open question.

All of that said, there is today an unprecedented set of market forces that is pushing all cannabis stakeholders to think outside of the box. The still growing opportunities in the cannabis industry, the will of operators to survive and succeed, as well as the increasing exposure from creditors, all point to not only an acceptance for the need of an alternative, but to the drive to do things differently.

Is your cannabis business in distress? Would you benefit from expert guidance and support in deciding on whether to enter into a receivership?Reach out to United CMC today.



Source link

Continue Reading

One-Hit Wonders

United States: Alex Malyshev And Melinda Fellner Discuss The Intersection Of Tax And Cannabis In New Video Series – Part VI: Licensing (Video)

Published

on

By


Carter Ledyard is pleased to announce the launch of our short-video series on the cannabis industry focusing on business and legal issues for those companies and entities interested in doing business in New York.

This series offers a perspective on tax policy and specific statutes affecting cannabis businesses today. Our cannabis shorts are a great way to get to know our professionals, Alex Malyshev and Melinda Fellner, in quick and easy to watch clips, packed with the salient information you need.

In Part VI of our series, Alex and Melinda discuss licensing for cannabis businesses in New York. Watch below!

 



Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending

Copyright © 2021 The Art of MaryJane Media