Skip to main content

Philadelphia City Council Passes Ordinance Barring Pre-Employment Marijuana Testing For Many Jobs

 

On April 22nd, the Philadelphia City Council voted 15 - 1 to approve an ordinance that would prohibit many employers in the city from requiring pre-employment marijuana testing as a condition of employment.  On April 28th, Philadelphia Major Jim Kenney signed the ordinance into law.

For those concerned about how expansive the ordinance is, I would caution that there are a lot of carve outs in which some employers can still require pre-employment marijuana testing.  For instance, jobs in law enforcement, for those needing a commercial driver’s license, health care workers, and “any position in which the employee could significantly impact the health or safety of other employees or members of the public” can still require pre-employment marijuana testing.  In addition, pre-employment marijuana testing is still allowed as set forth in any federal or state statute, regulation, or order that requires drug testing of prospective employees for safety or security reasons.

The ordinance is not set to take effect until January 1st.  However, as with any law or ordinance that has a delayed start, now is as good of a time as any for Philadelphia employers to take steps to ensure they do not run afoul of the ordinance.


For a copy of the ordinance:  https://phila.legistar.com/View.ashx?M=F&ID=9348490&GUID=E5EB8401-9105-4AC5-BF30-D6AE25DF072E

For additional information:  https://www.inquirer.com/politics/pennsylvania/philadelphia-employment-marijuana-testing-city-council-bill-20210422.html

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

NLRB: Discussion Among Employees About Tip Pooling is Protected Concerted Activity

  This Advice Memorandum from the National Labor Relations Board’s Associate General Counsel, Jayme Sophir, addressed whether employees which discussed and complained about tip pooling at work constituted protected concerted activity. In relevant part, an employer in New York operated a chain of steakhouses.  While tip pooling was in place at these steakhouses, some of the employees objected to it on the grounds that it was not transparent and improperly divided tips among the workers.  Employees were told not to complain or talk to each other about the tip pool and were told that doing so would endanger their jobs.  Despite the employer later attempting to provide some clarity as to how the tips were being divided, rancor still existed among some employees.  At one point, the employees were told by a general manager that some employees that had been talking about the tip pool were “cleared out” and the employer would continue to do so. In the Advice Memorandum,...
Post a Comment
Read more

San Diego Rolls Back Vaccine Mandate For City Workers

Last Tuesday, the San Diego City Council voted to do away with the vaccine mandate for city employees. The city’s vaccine mandate that was in place required city workers to get the coronavirus vaccine or risk termination.  Perhaps to this surprise of no one, the city’s policy came under fire with 14 employees being terminated and over 100 other employees resigning.  With the coronavirus subsiding, including in Southern California, the San Diego City Council took action. Now, bear in mind, the repeal of the vaccine mandate does not take place immediately. With that being said, the mandate will be repealed March 8th.  I suppose the question now is, what other cities or regions follow San Diego’s lead? For additional information:   https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/politics/story/2023-01-24/san-diego-repeals-controversial-covid-19-vaccine-mandate-citing-drop-in-cases-hospitalizations
Post a Comment
Read more

NLRB: Former Employee Cannot Be Barred From Work Premises After Filing Wage Suit

MEI-GSR Holdings, LLC - NLRB Facts :  MEI-GSR Holdings, LLC d/b/a Grand Sierra Resort & Casino ("GSR") operated a facility that included a hotel, casino, restaurant, clubs, bars, and a pool which were all open to the general public.  Tiffany Sargent ("Sargent") was briefly employed by GSR as a "beverage supervisor" in December of 2012.  After her employment ended, Sargent continued to socialize at one of the clubs.  GSR had a long standing practice of allowing former employees to patronize its facility and did not prohibit Sargent from doing so.  In June of 2013, Sargent and another employee filed a class and collective action against GSR for alleged unpaid wages, in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act and Nevada law.  In July of 2014, GSR denied Sargent access to an event at one of the clubs.  GSR followed up with a letter and stated that with the on-going litigation (from the wage suit), it decided to bar Sargent from the premises. ...
1 comment
Read more