[Back to Top]

A BILL FOR AN ACT

Relating to employment; amending ORS 475.340.

Be It Enacted by the People of the State of Oregon:

SECTION 1. ORS 475.340 is amended to read:

475.340. Nothing in ORS 475.300 to 475.346 shall be construed to [require]:

(1) Require a government medical assistance program or private health insurer to reimburse a person for costs associated with the medical use of marijuana[; or].

(2) Require an employer to:

(a) Accommodate the medical use of marijuana in any workplace regardless of where the use occurs;

(b) Allow an employee or independent contractor to possess, to consume or to be impaired by the use of marijuana during working hours; or

(c) Allow any person who is impaired by the use of marijuana to remain in the workplace.

(3) Preclude or restrict an employer from establishing or enforcing a policy to achieve or maintain a drug-free workforce.

[Back to Top]

A BILL FOR AN ACT

Relating to medical marijuana in the workplace; creating new provisions; and amending ORS 475.340.

Be It Enacted by the People of the State of Oregon:

SECTION 1. ORS 475.340 is amended to read: 475.340. Nothing in ORS 475.300 to 475.346 shall be construed to require:

(1) A government medical assistance program or private health insurer to reimburse a person for costs associated with the medical use of marijuana; or

(2) An employer to accommodate the medical use of marijuana [in any workplace] on the property or premises of any place employment or during hours of employment except as provided in section 3 of this 2009 Act.

SECTION 2. Sections 3 and 4 of this 2009 Act is added to and made a part of ORS 475.300 to 475.346.

SECTION 3. (1) It is unlawful for an employer to discriminate against a person in hiring, termination or any term or condition of employment or otherwise penalize a person if the discrimination is based on:

(a) The status of the person as a registry identification cardholder; or

(b) A positive drug test for marijuana if the person is a registry identification cardholder and the medical use of marijuana does not occur on the property or premises of the place of employment or during the hours of employment.

(2) The prohibition established by this section does not apply to an person employed in a safety-sensitive position. As used in this section, “safety-sensitive position” means a position in which:

(a) The medical use of marijuana could affect the performance of the employee and endanger the health and safety of others;

(b) The duties involve a greater than normal level of trust, responsibility for or impact on the health and safety of others;

(c) Errors in judgment, inattentiveness, or diminished coordination, dexterity, or composure while performing the duties of the position could clearly result in mistakes that would endanger the health and safety of others; and

(d) The employee works independently, or performs tasks of a nature that it cannot safely be assumed that mistakes such as those described in this subsection could be prevented by a supervisor or another employee.

(3) “Safety-sensitive position” includes a position that:

(a) Involves the performance of a “safety-sensitive function” as described in 49 C.F.R. 655.4; or

(b) Is held by a law enforcement official as defined in ORS 147.005.

(4) Nothing in this section prohibits an employer from terminating the employment of, or taking other corrective action against, an employee who is impaired on the property or premises of the place of employment or during the hours of employment, because of the medical use of marijuana.

SECTION 4. (1) Any violation of section 3 of this 2009 Act by an employer is an unlawful employment practice.

(2) Complaints alleging a violation of section 3 of this 2009 Act may be filed by an employee with the Commissioner of the Bureau of Labor and Industries. The commissioner shall enforce section 3 of this 2009 Act in the manner provided in ORS chapter 659A for the enforcement of other unlawful employment practices.

(3) Any person claiming to be aggrieved by a violation of section 3 of this 2009 Act may bring a civil action in the manner provided in ORS 659A.885.

[Back to Top]

A BILL FOR AN ACT

Relating to marijuana.

Be It Enacted by the People of the State of Oregon:

SECTION 1. The State Board of Pharmacy shall classify marijuana as a controlled substance in Schedule II.

[Back to Top]

SECTION 1. ORS 475.302 is amended to read:

(6) “Hashish” means:
(a) Resin that contains tetrahydrocannabinol and is extracted from any part of the Cannabis plant; or
(b) Any compound, manufacture, derivative, mixture or preparation made from the resin described in paragraph (a) of this subsection.

This is completely unnecessary, as current law already covers hashish and resins as "any mixture or preparation thereof" of marijuana.

(10) “Oregon Medical Marijuana Manual” means the manual prepared by the department in accordance with section 5 of this 2009 Act.

A manual is a good idea, until you require people to sign for it and require them to submit to a government dispute mediation process.

SECTION 2. ORS 475.320 is amended to read:
475.320. (1)(a) A registry identification cardholder [or] and the designated primary caregiver of the cardholder may collectively possess:
(A) Up to six mature marijuana plants [and 24];
(B) Twenty-four ounces of usable marijuana[.], no more than two ounces of which may be in the form of hashish that has not been combined with food or prepared in a tincture;
(C) A four-month supply of food that incorporates marijuana or hashish; and
(D) A four-month supply of tincture made from marijuana or hashish.

Now you see why they added a definition of hashish; so they could lower your right to possess it from 24 ounces down to two. Even sillier are definitions for medibles and tinctures that rely on vague "monthly supplies" that caused so much hassle in Washington State.

These new limits are unnecessary. Current law restricts the right of possession to 24 ounces. Anyone who makes hash from that 24 ounces is going to end up with less than 24 ounces of hash/ Hash and hash oil may be more concentrated than cannabis, but the overall amount of cannabis remains constant. Twenty four ounces of cannabis baked into brownies is still the same 24 ounces whether it is in 100 brownies or 1000 brownies. These limits would incentivize patients to use smoking raw cannabis over hash, which requires less smoking, and to use smoking cannabis or hash over eating medibles or tincture, which require no smoking at all.

(2) A person authorized under ORS 475.304 to produce marijuana at a marijuana grow site:
(a) May produce marijuana for and provide marijuana to a registry identification cardholder or that person's designated primary caregiver as authorized under this section.
(b) May possess up to six mature plants [and up to 24 ounces of usable marijuana] for each cardholder or caregiver for whom marijuana is being produced.
(c) May produce marijuana for no more than four registry identification cardholders or designated primary caregivers concurrently.
(d) May possess no more than 24 ounces of usable marijuana regardless of the number of cardholders for whom marijuana is being produced, unless the Department of Human Services has granted an exception under subsection (3) of this section allowing the person responsible for a marijuana grow site to store a cardholder's usable marijuana at the grow site.

(3) Upon the request of a registry identification cardholder who is unable to store usable marijuana at the cardholder's residence, the department may grant an exception to subsection (2)(d) of this section allowing a person responsible for a marijuana grow site to store the cardholder's usable marijuana at the grow site.

We already have a problem with patient access to medicine; there are far too few growers for all the patients. This limit will deter growers from taking on extra patients, as they would still get the benefit of four patients' worth of plants, but only be able to harvest one patients' worth of medicine. It also incentivizes patients to not share their growers and thereby cut their harvest in half, a third, or one quarter.

(5)(a) A registry identification cardholder and the designated primary caregiver of the cardholder may possess a combined total of up to 18 marijuana seedlings or starts as defined by rule of the department [of Human Services].
(b) A person responsible for a marijuana grow site may possess up to 18 marijuana seedlings or starts as defined by rule of the department for each registry identification cardholder for whom the person responsible for the marijuana grow site is producing marijuana.
(c) The department shall define by rule when a marijuana plant is mature. The rule must provide that a plant that has no flowers and that is less than 18 inches in height and less than 18 inches in diameter is a seedling or a start and is not a mature plant.

SECTION 3

[(3) The Department of Human Services shall define by rule when a marijuana plant is mature and when it is immature. The rule shall provide that a plant that has no flowers and that is less than 12 inches in height and less than 12 inches in diameter is a seedling or a start and is not a mature plant.]

It is good to see a more reasonable seedling limit of 18 inches, but this is hardly a change worth supporting this bill.

SECTION 4. Section 5 of this 2009 Act is added to and made a part of ORS 475.300 to 475.346.

SECTION 5. The Department of Human Services shall prepare an Oregon Medical Marijuana Manual describing the rights and obligations of registry identification cardholders, designated primary caregivers and persons responsible for marijuana grow sites. The department shall prepare the manual in language that is as clear and simple as possible, and shall make the manual available in formats that accommodate persons with disabilities.

SECTION 6. ORS 475.304 is amended to read:
475.304. (1) The Department of Human Services shall establish by rule a marijuana grow site registration system to authorize production of marijuana by a registry identification cardholder, a designated primary caregiver who grows marijuana for the cardholder or a person who is responsible for a marijuana grow site. The marijuana grow site registration system adopted must require a registry identification cardholder and the person responsible for the cardholder's marijuana grow site to submit an application to the department that includes:

(d) A statement that the person responsible for the marijuana grow site has read the Oregon Medical Marijuana Manual and understands its contents;
(e) A statement that, if the registry identification cardholder submits a dispute with the person responsible for the marijuana grow site to the department in accordance with section 10 of this 2009 Act, the cardholder and the person responsible for the marijuana grow site agree to comply with the department's investigation and resolution of the dispute;

SECTION 7. ORS 475.309 is amended to read:

(2)(f) A written statement that the person has read the Oregon Medical Marijuana Manual and understands its contents.

(3)(e) The custodial parent or legal guardian with responsibility for health care decisions for the person under 18 years of age has read the Oregon Medical Marijuana Manual and understands its contents.

The idea of an Oregon Medical Marijuana Manual is something Oregon NORML has supported for years; we've even printed our own version. However, this requirement to sign and abide by this manual also comes with acceptance of an extra-judicial arbitration agreement controlled by the department (see below):

SECTION 8. ORS 475.312 is amended to read:

475.312. (1) If a person who possesses a registry identification card issued pursuant to ORS 475.309 chooses to have a designated primary caregiver, the person must designate the primary caregiver [by including the primary caregiver's name and address]:
(a) On the person's application for a registry identification card;
(b) In the annual updated information required under ORS 475.309; or
(c) In a written, signed statement submitted to the Department of Human Services.

(2) The designation of the primary caregiver required by subsection (1) of this section must include:
(a) The primary caregiver's name and address;
(b) A statement that the primary caregiver has read the Oregon Medical Marijuana Manual and understands its contents; and
(c) A statement that, if the registry identification cardholder submits a dispute with the primary caregiver to the department in accordance with section 10 of this 2009 Act, the primary caregiver agrees to comply with the department's investigation and resolution of the dispute.

SECTION 9. Section 10 of this 2009 Act is added to and made a part of ORS 475.300 to 475.346.

SECTION 10. (1) When a registry identification cardholder has a dispute with a designated primary caregiver or person responsible for a grow site, the registry identification cardholder may submit the dispute to the Department of Human Services for investigation and resolution.

(2) When a registry identification cardholder submits a dispute to the department, the department shall conduct an investigation, including but not limited to:
(a) Interviewing parties involved in the dispute, including the registry identification cardholder, the designated primary caregiver and persons responsible for grow sites; and
(b) Inspecting grow sites involved in the dispute.

(3) The department may conduct mediation between the parties involved in the dispute.

(4) In resolving a dispute, the department may revoke a designated primary caregiver's registry identification card or a marijuana grow site registration card for a period of up to six months, at the discretion of the department.
(5) Within 90 days after the registry identification cardholder submits a dispute to the department, the department shall issue its decision resolving the dispute in writing to all parties involved in the dispute. The department¢s decision is subject to judicial review as a contested case under ORS chapter 183.

(6) If in the course of its investigation of a dispute the department gathers any evidence of illegal activity, the department shall provide the evidence to an appropriate law enforcement agency.

SECTION 11. The amendments to ORS 475.304, 475.309 and 475.312 by sections 6, 7 and 8 of this 2009 Act apply to applications submitted on or after March 1, 2010.

If you want to see the number of caregivers and growers willing to help patients plummet, pass this law and tell them that at any time when their patient may have a grievance, they can call in DHS, who will then interview them, inspect their grow sites (usually their homes), suspend their caregiver/grower card for six months, and forward any findings of criminal activity to law enforcement for prosecution.

[Back to Top]

SECTION 1. ORS 475.340 is amended to read:

475.340. Nothing in ORS 475.300 to 475.346 shall be construed to require:

(1) Requires a government medical assistance program or private health insurer to reimburse a person for costs associated with the medical use of marijuana; or

(2)

Requires an employer to:

(a) Accommodate the medical use of marijuana in any workplace.

regardless of where the use occurs;

(b) Allow an employee or independent contractor to possess, consume or be impaired by the use of marijuana during working hours; or

(c) Allow any person who is impaired by the use of marijuana to remain in the workplace; or

(3) Precludes or restricts an employer from establishing or enforcing a policy to achieve or maintain a drug-free workforce.

[Back to Top]

Click link above for full language - highlights listed here:

SECTION 1. Definitions (3) “Drug” means a substance considered unlawful under the schedules of the controlled substances section of the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970, 21 U.S.C. 812, or a metabolite of the substance.

SECTION 4. Collection of samples. (1) An employer may test an employee for the presence of drugs or alcohol. An employer may test a prospective employee for the presence of drugs.

SECTION 8. Cause of action against an employer. (2) Except as provided in subsection (4) of this section, a cause of action does not arise against an employer who has established a program of drug or alcohol testing in accordance with the testing and policy safeguards provided for under sections 1 to 9 of this 2009 Act, unless the following conditions exist:

(a) The employer¢s action was based on a false positive drug or alcohol test result; and

(b) The employer knew or clearly should have known that the test result was in error and the employer ignored the correct test result because of a reckless, malicious or negligent disregard for the truth or a willful intent to deceive or be deceived.

(3) A cause of action for defamation, libel, slander or damage to reputation does not arise against an employer who has established a program of drug or alcohol testing in accordance with the testing and policy safeguards provided for under sections 1 to 9 of this 2009 Act, unless the following conditions exist:

(a) The employer disclosed test results to a person other than the employer, an authorized employee, agent or representative of the employer, the tested employee or the tested prospective employee, an authorized agent or representative of the employee or prospective employee, an authorized substance abuse treatment program or an employee assistance program;

(b) The test results incorrectly indicate the presence of drugs or alcohol; and

(c) The employer recklessly disclosed the test results.

(4) In any cause of action based upon a false positive drug or alcohol test result:

(a) The results of a drug or alcohol test conducted in compliance with the testing and policy safeguards provided for under sections 1 to 9 of this 2009 Act are presumed to be valid; and

(b) The employer is not liable for monetary damages if the employer¢s reliance on the false positive test result was reasonable and in good faith.

(C) Injury the major contributing cause of which is demonstrated to be by a preponderance of the evidence the injured worker's consumption of alcoholic beverages or the unlawful consumption of any controlled substance, unless the employer permitted, encouraged or had actual knowledge of such consumption. Evidence of a positive post-accident drug test administered within 32 hours after an accident, or evidence of a positive post-accident alcohol test administered within eight hours after an accident, establishes a rebuttable presumption that the injured worker's consumption was a major contributing cause of the injury.

(4) For purposes of this section, an applicant or employee must demonstrate that the applicant or employee has not engaged in the illegal use of drugs for a period of no less than 30 days to be a person who is no longer engaging in the illegal use of drugs.

(3) An employer may require that employees not be under the influence of alcohol or illegally used drugs at the workplace. For purposes of this subsection, an employer may enforce a policy that having any detectable level of alcohol or illegally used drugs, or their metabolites, in an employee's system is proof that the employee is under the influence of alcohol or illegally used drugs.

(13) A person who has applied for a registry identification card under this section and who is employed shall notify the person's employer before engaging in the medical use of marijuana.

475.340. Nothing in ORS 475.300 to 475.346 shall be construed to require:

(1) A government medical assistance program or private health insurer to reimburse a person for costs associated with the medical use of marijuana; or

(2) An employer to accommodate make a workplace accommodation under ORS 659A.100 to 659A.145 for the medical use of marijuana in any workplace no matter where that use occurs.

---

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the `Drug Testing Integrity Act of 2009'.

SEC. 2. BAN OF PRODUCTS DESIGNED TO DEFRAUD DRUG TESTS.

(a) Conduct Prohibited- It shall be unlawful to knowingly manufacture, market, sell, ship, or otherwise provide to another individual any product with the intent to assist such other individual to use such product to defraud a drug test.

(b) Definition- As used in this Act, the term `defraud a drug test' means--

(1) submit a substance that purports to be from an individual other than its actual source, or purports to have been excreted or collected other than when it was actually excreted or collected; or

(2) engage in any other conduct with the intent to produce a false or misleading outcome of a test for the presence of a controlled substance.

SEC. 3. ENFORCEMENT BY THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION.

(a) Unfair and Deceptive Act or Practice- A violation of section 2 shall be treated as a violation of a rule defining an unfair or deceptive act or practice prescribed under section 18(a)(1)(B) of the Federal Trade Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 57a(a)(1)(B)).

(b) Enforcement Authority- The Federal Trade Commission shall enforce this Act in the same manner, by the same means, and with the same jurisdiction as though all applicable terms and provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act were incorporated into and made a part of this Act.

While we do not support or condone the use of products to defraud a drug test (we prefer just not taking them), we also believe this legislation is impractical and ineffective. Many common products, such as vitamins and fruit juices and Lawry's Adolph's Meat Tenderizer, can be used for purposes of detoxifying one's body of drug metabolites, so these detoxifiers with still be sold, just marketed more surreptitiously.

This law also makes failing a drug test by simply drinking water or possessing your own urine possible crimes to be investigated with all the power of the Federal Trade Commission. Language like "engage in any other conduct" is overly broad and could be used against someone who, for example, stopped using drugs and took up exercise and proper hydration and creatine supplements to help recover from weight training, and then failed the drug test for having urine that is too dilute with creatine levels too high.