Would this company be breaking the law in this circumstance if the dismissed someone?

Commotion Ocean

A company, when hiring employees states clearly on their contract:

"No employee shall use illegal recreational drugs when employed by the company and drug tests shall be carried out on a regular basis and can be done at random and without warning by the company doctor at the discretion of management". This is actually in my own work contract.

If for example, cannabis was legalised in Ireland but the wording of the contract in work was not amended (or a new contract wasn't signed by the employee) when cannabis became legal in Ireland, could the company legally fire me if I was found to be smoking cannabis through blood tests? (Even if it didn't affect my performance).

If you look at the situation, there are no rules being broken. The contract only states illegal drugs, since cannabis wouldn't be illegal, then no contract is broken.

Just curious, I'm not a cannabis smoker. The height limit is 2 metres. High horses won't fit.

Paulw

I think there are two very important words - illegal and recreational.

The talk currently is about legalising medical marijuana, nothing about recreational cannabis smoking. I also suspect that a prescription would be needed for medical marijuana and this could be shown to the company doctor so excluding that contract clause.

Obviously, currently it's illegal to use it in Ireland.

Commotion Ocean

Paulw wrote: »

I think there are two very important words - illegal and recreational.

The talk currently is about legalising medical marijuana, nothing about recreational cannabis smoking. I also suspect that a prescription would be needed for medical marijuana and this could be shown to the company doctor so excluding that contract clause.

Obviously, currently it's illegal to use it in Ireland.

Which is why I asked IF it became legal.

My contract specifies illegal substances. IF cannabis were legalised in Ireland, it would obviously be ... legal.

Paulw

dfeo wrote: »

My contract specifies illegal substances. IF cannabis were legalised in Ireland, it would obviously be ... legal.

I guess. But again, there is a difference between medical use and recreational use, and the law would determine if there is a distinction between those, which could impact on that contract clause.

Commotion Ocean

Paulw wrote: »

I guess. But again, there is a difference between medical use and recreational use, and the law would determine if there is a distinction between those, which could impact on that contract clause.

I'm not talking about medical use. I'm talking about recreational use of a substance which was once illegal for recreational use and is now lwgal for recreational use.

Denny_Crane

Have they fired anyone for smoking tobacco or drinking beer?

It's seems a bit of an odd question you're posting given the contracts says 'illegal recreational drugs'. You're asking if I was using a legal recreational drug could they fire me? Who knows maybe they'll decide to fire you but the above clause in the contract would have absolutely no relevance any more.

Am I missing something here?

jimmycrackcorm

Paulw wrote:

I guess. But again, there is a difference between medical use and recreational use, and the law would determine if there is a distinction between those, which could impact on that contract clause.

This. I don't know what the confusion is. Medical marijuana might become legal, yet recreational use, I.e. Without a doctor's prescription, be illegal.

Commotion Ocean

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

This. I don't know what the confusion is. Medical marijuana might become legal, yet recreational use, I.e. Without a doctor's prescription, be illegal.

Jesus H Christ. I'm not talking about the current legislative changes. I'm talking about a hypothetical situation wherein cannabis is fully legalised (for recreational use).

Can the company prohibit its employees from taking something which is completely legal (as long as it doesn't affect their performance).

Denny_Crane

dfeo wrote: »

Jesus H Christ. I'm not talking about the current legislative changes. I'm talking about a hypothetical situation wherein cannabis is fully legalised (for recreational use).

Can the company prohibit its employees from taking something which is completely legal (as long as it doesn't affect their performance).

Honestly dfeo, people aren't trying to be difficult. The question is very oddly put.

The new question you're asking is a bit more sensible. I can't imagine it would be legal to fire people, but not hire them in the first place may not be so problematic.

Senna

Can you arrive at work drunk?

There is normally a Drug and Alcohol policy, legal drugs would be covered by it and it would be altered if legislation changed.

CIARAN_BOYLE

Well I might assume they can ban you working under the influence of Cannabis but what you do on your own time within the laws would appear to be your own business.

Senna

CIARAN_BOYLE wrote: »

Well I might assume they can ban you working under the influence of Cannabis but what you do on your own time within the laws would appear to be your own business.

Of course. I really don't think you know what you are asking. Yes you can still be drug tested after a drug is made legal, but the test would be for other drugs, you know, the illegal ones, not the legal ones.

davindub

dfeo wrote: »

Jesus H Christ. I'm not talking about the current legislative changes. I'm talking about a hypothetical situation wherein cannabis is fully legalised (for recreational use).

Can the company prohibit its employees from taking something which is completely legal (as long as it doesn't affect their performance).

"illegal recreational drugs when employed by the company" - if something is legal, it's not illegal.

dfeo

dfeo wrote: »

Jesus H Christ. I'm not talking about the current legislative changes. I'm talking about a hypothetical situation wherein cannabis is fully legalised (for recreational use).

Can the company prohibit its employees from taking something which is completely legal (as long as it doesn't affect their performance).

Would you calm down. Your original post was not at all clear.

In any "hypothetical" situation, you also have the allowance of said company changing their policy/wording in advance of said hypothetical situation becoming law. there would also be a consultation period before legislation became law, depending on the wording, so you're asking how long is a piece of string question at this point.

Alcohol limits for certain jobs may be zero tolerance when tested- while currently alcohol users can has a somewhat predictive time to leave your body and as a result, "Cannabis" is an unknown entity, given the various grades/strengths etc. So it's likely that their policy statement will be very similar to their alcohol statement- a zero tolerance for either.

Little CuChulainn

davindub wrote: »

"illegal recreational drugs when employed by the company" - if something is legal, it's not illegal.

Seems pretty obvious.

Carawaystick

How would the company testing know the legal status of the drug in the country you consumed it?

If you went to Portugal, consumed drug, where it's not illegal.
Or less esoterically, went to the uk, got treated in a hospital there with a drug which is not legal to use here.
Alternatively, took a drug( which is legal here) in a country where it is illegal?

Also how would the doctor show the drug testing is truly random?

Peregrinus

dfeo wrote: »

Jesus H Christ. I'm not talking about the current legislative changes. I'm talking about a hypothetical situation wherein cannabis is fully legalised (for recreational use).

Can the company prohibit its employees from taking something which is completely legal (as long as it doesn't affect their performance).

The current contract, obviously, doesn't do this.

So your question really comes down to this: could an employer make it a term of the employment contract that an employee not use recreational drugs, even if they are legal to use, give the company a right to test for drug use, and make failing a test a disciplinary matter?

They would work hard to justify a ban on all use of legal drugs in your own time, and it would requires special and unusual facts, I think, to justify such a ban and have the courts hold it unenforceable. If, for example, you were employed as a temperance advocate it could be a term of your contract that you not drink, since that might tend to undermine the temperance message you are paid to promote. But, outside circumstances like that, I don't think you could enforce such a clause.

It's much easier to justify a "not be under the influence at work" clause, supported by testing. The fact that alcohol is legal doesn't make it OK to turn up for work under the influence of alcohol and, if cannabis were legal, the same would be true. The company could justify this by reference to health and safety, or by reference to performance efficiency, or even by reference to public concern - even if that concern is excessive or misplaced, it's still a legitimate consideration for an employer seeking to reassure customers and potential customers.

livedadream

maybe people are confused due to the clarity of the issue,

if you contract says you cant break the law and you break the law then toodles
however if you dont break the law then you can stay

its not very difficult OP.

it weed becomes legal then it wont be an illegal substance anymore therefore you wont be after taking an illegal substance. you will find however most companies are on top of this and would have a clause whereby ANY drug or intoxicant cant be tested for be it legal or illegal.
ie: a haulage firm will say you cannot come to work when taking certain prescribed drugs due to the nature of side effects.

i worked for a clean room service where drug testing was common, compliance was very strict, any non declared intoxicant found meant an investigate and potential warning or dismissal, therefore your two spliffs of a saturday evening (whether legal or not) meant you were in breach of your duties and open to dismissal.

Mr. Incognito

dfeo wrote: »

Jesus H Christ. I'm not talking about the current legislative changes. I'm talking about a hypothetical situation wherein cannabis is fully legalised (for recreational use).

Can the company prohibit its employees from taking something which is completely legal (as long as it doesn't affect their performance).

So you are asking for a SPECIFIC answer based on a HYPOTHETICAL scenario.

The simple answer is that this is a logical fallacy.

Something along the lines of

Does a Unicorns fart smell like beer if it Drinks Heineken.

Does the Loch Ness Monster like Almond Magnums.

Can an employer fire you for smoking weed if weed is legal.

No answer is available due to the utter nonsense of the question and the misunderstandng and blind fumbling around that has resulted.