Michael Goldfarb’s Post

Not sure if you can drug test your employees, how to go about it, or what to do if someone refuses? The good news is that yes, you can implement drug testing! 😁 Employment lawyer Elissa Thursfield explains everything you need to know about handling drug testing in the workplace, including best practices and legal obligations 👉 https://lnkd.in/eM5QeteV Looking for guidance on how to implement drug testing in your workplace? Get in touch with the team today. #DrugTesting #Workplace #HR #EmploymentLaw #Hroes

Learn about ADA implications for drug testing in California, including legal compliance, employee rights, and best practices for workplace policies. https://lnkd.in/g_hhAjF4 #californiadrugtesting #drugtesting #ADA #Talcada

It's crucial for employers to regularly update their policies to align with evolving jurisprudence, ensuring compliance with legal standards, mitigating risks, and fostering a fair and lawful workplace environment. #Misconduct - Drug use - Call centre operators dismissed for reporting for duty with traces of #marijuana in blood, but not showing signs of #intoxication - Dismissals unfair. The two applicants, both call centre consultants, were dismissed after traces of marijuana had been found in their blood. The applicants denied that they had smoked marijuana while at work and that they were intoxicated when the tests were administered, but admitted that they had smoked the drug at home, which they claimed they were entitled to do. The respondent contended that its disciplinary code provided for dismissal for a first offence of this nature, as the applicants were aware. The Commissioner noted that both applicants had desk jobs. There is a difference between being under the influence of a drug and having traces of it in one's system. Unlike alcohol, traces of marijuana can remain in the blood for up to 14 days. In two recent judgments, the Labour Court had found that that dismissals of employees who smoked marijuana at home and reported for duty without showing signs of intoxication were unfair. The respondent had relied solely on its "zero-tolerance" policy on drug and alcohol use, which did not in itself render the dismissals fair. As the case law made clear, each case had to be treated on its own facts. Strict rules against use of alcohol or drugs may be justified where employees work in dangerous conditions. Neither employee had shown any sign of being negatively affected by the marijuana they had smoked or posed any danger to themselves or colleagues. Although dismissal was inappropriate in these circumstances, the applicants had shown scant regard for their employer's duty to maintain health and safety in its workplace. The applicants were reinstated without back pay. #lexisnexis #cannabis #policyandprocedures #misconduct #drugtesting

📅 Mark your calendars! On July 24, we are hosting a crucial training session on ‘Reasonable Suspicion: The Impact of Marijuana, Drugs, and Alcohol at Work’. Gain insights into legal requirements, responding to substance use, and developing robust workplace policies. Ideal for HR professionals, supervisors, and managers. Secure your spot today! https://loom.ly/dYC0zKM #HRTraining #WorkplaceSafety #SubstanceAbusePolicy

⌛ Save your spot, space is limited! On July 24, we are hosting a crucial training session on ‘Reasonable Suspicion: The Impact of Marijuana, Drugs, and Alcohol at Work’. Gain insights into legal requirements, responding to substance use, and developing robust workplace policies. Ideal for HR professionals, supervisors, and managers. Secure your spot today! https://loom.ly/dYC0zKM #HRTraining #WorkplaceSafety #SubstanceAbusePolicy

#leadership #culture #hr #peopleandculture #policingforthepublic Metropolitan Police National Police Chiefs' Council College of Policing #leadership creates the Value and Culture of the organisation. The sacking of the Commander who chaired Misconduct Panels in Metropolitan Police for refusing to take a drugs test has been overturned. Colloquially known as ‘Sacker’ because 75% of those who appeared before him were dismissed. By failing to provide the sample , he had been found to have breached professional standards of honesty and integrity, orders and instructions and discreditable conduct. His lawyers argued at an appeal tribunal , that while he had admitted refusing to provide a sample , the disciplinary panel had found him guilty of a lack of integrity which he had not been charged with . This meant that the misconduct verdict was not permissible they successfully argued. The implications of this are significant. The reputation of the Met and the police disciplinary procedures are clearly tarnished. Public trust and confidence in Policing is not where it needs to be for a number of reasons. This case exacerbates those concerns about professional standards of those we rely upon to protect us all. What are the implications in other private and public sector organisations where an employee refuses to take a drugs test? Gross Misconduct? Instant dismissal? It will be good to hear from HR colleagues and Employment Law lawyers as to the options available to employers faced with this situation. #leadership is accountability and responsibility.

Navigating cannabis workplace in New York has been a bit confusing - so let’s clear the haze! 💨 Here's what employers need to know: Employee rights: Employees have the right to use cannabis outside of work, but employers can prohibit possession on company property. Employer restrictions: Employers cannot prohibit off-work cannabis use but may restrict it during on-call periods or when work is expected. Drug testing: Positive drug tests alone aren't grounds for action unless related to accidents or impairment. Remember: Stay informed about New York's At-Will Employment Law to avoid legal pitfalls. Let's keep your workplace compliant and your employees happy! #cannabisintheworkplace #nyscannabislaw #instalawyer #cannabislaw Attorney Advertising

Workplace drug/alcohol policies in a legal weed world: 10 easy steps Robin Shea of Labor & Employment Insights provides clarity in the ridiculously obscure area of the law.

Our hosts Tina, Jennie, and Christy sit down for an increasingly top of mind topic for many employers - weed in the workplace. 🔊Christy offers her insight on how employers can best navigate marijuana issues such as legalized recreational and medical use, ADA claims, testing, and much more while subject to complicated state laws. Tune in for our latest episode at www.workthiswaypod.com! #employmentlaw #employers #hr #hrpodcast

This case AGAIN highlights why it's crucial for employers to regularly update their policies to align with evolving jurisprudence, ensuring compliance with legal standards, mitigating risks, and fostering a fair and lawful workplace environment. Nkosi and another / Merchants SA (Pty) Ltd t/a Dimension Data Company - (2024) 33 CCMA 8.11.10 also reported at [2024] 11 BALR 1242 (CCMA) Misconduct - Drug use - Call centre operators dismissed for reporting for duty with traces of marijuana in blood, but not showing signs of intoxication - Dismissals unfair. The two applicants, both call centre consultants, were dismissed after traces of marijuana had been found in their blood. The applicants denied that they had smoked marijuana while at work and that they were intoxicated when the tests were administered, but admitted that they had smoked the drug at home, which they claimed they were entitled to do. The respondent contended that its disciplinary code provided for dismissal for a first offence of this nature, as the applicants were aware. The Commissioner noted that both applicants had desk jobs. There is a difference between being under the influence of a drug and having traces of it in one's system. Unlike alcohol, traces of marijuana can remain in the blood for up to 14 days. In two recent judgments, the Labour Court had found that that dismissals of employees who smoked marijuana at home and reported for duty without showing signs of intoxication were unfair. The respondent had relied solely on its "zero-tolerance" policy on drug and alcohol use, which did not in itself render the dismissals fair. As the case law made clear, each case had to be treated on its own facts. Strict rules against use of alcohol or drugs may be justified where employees work in dangerous conditions. Neither employee had shown any sign of being negatively affected by the marijuana they had smoked or posed any danger to themselves or colleagues. Although dismissal was inappropriate in these circumstances, the applicants had shown scant regard for their employer's duty to maintain health and safety in its workplace. The applicants were reinstated without back pay. #lexisnexis #cannabis #policyandprocedures #misconduct #drugtesting #labourlaw