Who smokes the blunts? Not Wal-Mart

A Michigan Wal-Mart's 2008 Associate-of-the-Year, who smokes legally-prescribed medical marijuana for his sinus cancer and inoperable brain tumor, was fired after weed shockingly came up in a drug test and the corporation told him they "do not accept or honor" his medical marijuana card.

Quote :

BATTLE CREEK, Mich. (WZZM) - Now that medical marijuana is legal in Michigan, can an employer fire a worker who tests positive for the drug?

WalMart says it can, so it did. "I was terminated because I failed a drug screening," says former WalMart employee Joseph Casias.

In 2008, Casias was the Associate Of The Year at the WalMart store in Battle Creek, despite suffering from sinus cancer and an inoperable brain tumor

At his doctor's recommendation, Casias says he legally uses medical marijuana to ease his pain.

"It helps tremendously," he says. "I only use it to stop the pain. To make me feel more comfortable and active as a person."

During his five years at WalMart, Casias says he went to work every day, determined to be the best.

"I gave them everything," he says. "110 percent every day. Anything they asked me to do I did. More than they asked me to do. 12 to 14 hours a day."

But last November, Casias sprained his knee at work. Marijuana was detected in his system during the routine drug screening that follows all workplace injuries. Casias showed WalMart managers his state medical marijuana card, but he was fired anyway.

"I was told they do not accept or honor my medical marijuana card," says Casias.

In an e-mail from headquarters, WalMart spokesman Greg Rossiter explained the company policy. It states: "In states, such as Michigan, where prescriptions for marijuana can be obtained, an employer can still enforce a policy that requires termination of employment following a positive drug screen. We believe our policy complies with the law and we support decisions based on the policy."

Casias says he never used marijuana before work.

"No, I never came to work under the influence, never," he says. "I don't think it's fair. Because I have a medical condition I can't work and provide for my family?"

Casias has been collecting unemployment compensation since he was fired in November but this week he says he was notified WalMart is challenging his eligibility for benefits.

"It's not fair," he says.

Oh, Wal-Mart...

Quote :

Oh, Wal-Mart...

I was about to say that. Because thats all I got.

Another reason not to shop at fucking Wal-Mart. Like I needed one.

Technically, Michigan is an state where all employment is at will. This means that any employer can at any time fire somebody for any or no reason.

Yes it is a shitty thing that they fired this guy for taking his medicine, but at the same time they are fully within their rights to fire him for any reason they want.

Knight wrote:

Technically, Michigan is an state where all employment is at will. This means that any employer can at any time fire somebody for any or no reason.

Yes it is a shitty thing that they fired this guy for taking his medicine, but at the same time they are fully within their rights to fire him for any reason they want.

Am I the only one who thinks that is dumb as shit?

Reepicheep-chan wrote:

Knight wrote:

Technically, Michigan is an state where all employment is at will. This means that any employer can at any time fire somebody for any or no reason.

Yes it is a shitty thing that they fired this guy for taking his medicine, but at the same time they are fully within their rights to fire him for any reason they want.

Am I the only one who thinks that is dumb as shit?

Nah, I think it's stupid as hell myself, but that's the way it is in many states in the US. Basically unless you can absolutely prove that they fired you for a certain reason that qualifies as discrimination, then there's nothing that can be done about it.

Also, it is worth keeping in mind that while medical marijuana may be legal in the state of Michigan it is still illegal on a federal level, and I doubt Wal-Mart is going to make a different contract in the few states that have legalized medical marijuana. So even though the man was simply taking medicine, and doing so to make his life more bearable, he was probably still in violation of his employment contract.

The class war ended a long time ago. We lost.

Reepicheep-chan wrote:

Knight wrote:

Technically, Michigan is an state where all employment is at will. This means that any employer can at any time fire somebody for any or no reason.

Yes it is a shitty thing that they fired this guy for taking his medicine, but at the same time they are fully within their rights to fire him for any reason they want.

Am I the only one who thinks that is dumb as shit?

Nope. That makes about as much sense as firing someone for taking legally prescribed painkillers.

Edit: Am I the only one who thinks WalMart saw a golden opportunity to try to prevent employees from filing Workman's Comp claims?

This sucks. I can understand Wal-Mart's reasoning, but I do not condone it. Unfortunately that's the way it goes in retail it seems.
Where my husband works, a guy in the butchery asked the manager whether he could take the off meat for the local animal shelter. The boss said yes. They caught the guy with a bagful of meat and fired him. The manager intervened saying he had given the authorisation and they fired him as well.
Another guy was fired because he found outside the store a voucher of lunch leaflets and tossed them in the bin.
Given that they have no real production quotas to reach, managers are considered efficient when they manage to run their department smoothly in spite of a severe understaffing. It's the American way, and it has reached Europe, too.

Nihilist wrote:

If this was a zero-tolerance policy, doing that would risk me my own job, but personally, I prefer doing the right thing as opposed to "the law states we should do this", especially in situations like these. But then, nobody ever said I was particularly smart.

Not arguing this particular case, but in general- that's easy to say (and maybe even to act on) when you're young, single and bouncing from job to job anyway. Imagine there's a wife in the mix, children, maybe a mortgage. Eating Ramen for weeks on end may be feasible for you, personally, but not for your toddlers.
I would like to believe I'd always act according to what I believe is right, but I think sometimes it's not that easy.



PS Darth, is that Mr Morden?

Lady Anne wrote:

Reepicheep-chan wrote:

Knight wrote:

Technically, Michigan is an state where all employment is at will. This means that any employer can at any time fire somebody for any or no reason.

Yes it is a shitty thing that they fired this guy for taking his medicine, but at the same time they are fully within their rights to fire him for any reason they want.

Am I the only one who thinks that is dumb as shit?

Nope. That makes about as much sense as firing someone for taking legally prescribed painkillers.

And they could probably fire that someone as well if they came up positive in a drug test at a zero-tolerance company. I can think of a couple places around here that are like that. Might not be a universal thing, but yeah, it exists.

grmblfjx wrote:

PS Darth, is that Mr Morden?

Why yes, yes it is. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Anne wrote:

Edit: Am I the only one who thinks WalMart
saw a golden opportunity to try to prevent employees from filing
Workman's Comp claims?

Oh no, I'm SURE the CEO noticed that someone was about to possibly cost Wal Mart $100 a month in medical marijuana expenses and decided to have him fired.

Also, I thought workman's comp was typically only for injuries and diseases suffered because of the job. Like, if this dude was doing whatever it is he did and that directly led to him breaking his leg or whatever, it'd be applicable. But if he just develops cancer on his own time, it's none of the employer's problem.

I thought that was why it was WORKMAN's comp. If it was just for anything that happened to you, it'd be called comp.

DarthDarthington wrote:

grmblfjx wrote:

PS Darth, is that Mr Morden?

Why yes, yes it is. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

And no pike? Tsk, tsk. I thought that was his best look.

Mikey Go WOOGA wrote:

Anne wrote:

Edit: Am I the only one who thinks WalMart
saw a golden opportunity to try to prevent employees from filing
Workman's Comp claims?

Oh no, I'm SURE the CEO noticed that someone was about to possibly cost Wal Mart $100 a month in medical marijuana expenses and decided to have him fired.

Also, I thought workman's comp was typically only for injuries and diseases suffered because of the job. Like, if this dude was doing whatever it is he did and that directly led to him breaking his leg or whatever, it'd be applicable. But if he just develops cancer on his own time, it's none of the employer's problem.

I thought that was why it was WORKMAN's comp. If it was just for anything that happened to you, it'd be called comp.

He sprained his knee at work. That was what the Workman's Comp claim was over.

DarthDarthington wrote:

rachel wrote:

DarthDarthington wrote:

grmblfjx wrote:

PS Darth, is that Mr Morden?

Why yes, yes it is. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

And no pike? Tsk, tsk. I thought that was his best look.

And Vir Cotto agrees!

Knight wrote:

Reepicheep-chan wrote:

Knight wrote:

Technically, Michigan is an state where all employment is at will. This means that any employer can at any time fire somebody for any or no reason.

Yes it is a shitty thing that they fired this guy for taking his medicine, but at the same time they are fully within their rights to fire him for any reason they want.

Am I the only one who thinks that is dumb as shit?

Nah, I think it's stupid as hell myself, but that's the way it is in many states in the US. Basically unless you can absolutely prove that they fired you for a certain reason that qualifies as discrimination, then there's nothing that can be done about it.

Also, it is worth keeping in mind that while medical marijuana may be legal in the state of Michigan it is still illegal on a federal level, and I doubt Wal-Mart is going to make a different contract in the few states that have legalized medical marijuana. So even though the man was simply taking medicine, and doing so to make his life more bearable, he was probably still in violation of his employment contract.

Nevada is a right to work state. Imagine working every day at your shitty, dead-end retail job knowing that at any moment the manager who doesn't like you personally can fire your miserable ass without any real reason.

BLUH

Lady Anne wrote:

Mikey Go WOOGA wrote:

Anne wrote:

Edit: Am I the only one who thinks WalMart
saw a golden opportunity to try to prevent employees from filing
Workman's Comp claims?

Oh no, I'm SURE the CEO noticed that someone was about to possibly cost Wal Mart $100 a month in medical marijuana expenses and decided to have him fired.

Also, I thought workman's comp was typically only for injuries and diseases suffered because of the job. Like, if this dude was doing whatever it is he did and that directly led to him breaking his leg or whatever, it'd be applicable. But if he just develops cancer on his own time, it's none of the employer's problem.

I thought that was why it was WORKMAN's comp. If it was just for anything that happened to you, it'd be called comp.

He sprained his knee at work. That was what the Workman's Comp claim was over.

Ah. What does a sprained knee cost to repair? A $15 brace from Wal Mart, periodic ice, and a week or two off of it.

That seems like an expense a company that makes billions would go out of their way to avoid.

Mikey Go WOOGA wrote:

Lady Anne wrote:

Mikey Go WOOGA wrote:

Anne wrote:

Edit: Am I the only one who thinks WalMart
saw a golden opportunity to try to prevent employees from filing
Workman's Comp claims?

Oh no, I'm SURE the CEO noticed that someone was about to possibly cost Wal Mart $100 a month in medical marijuana expenses and decided to have him fired.

Also, I thought workman's comp was typically only for injuries and diseases suffered because of the job. Like, if this dude was doing whatever it is he did and that directly led to him breaking his leg or whatever, it'd be applicable. But if he just develops cancer on his own time, it's none of the employer's problem.

I thought that was why it was WORKMAN's comp. If it was just for anything that happened to you, it'd be called comp.

He sprained his knee at work. That was what the Workman's Comp claim was over.

Ah. What does a sprained knee cost to repair? A $15 brace from Wal Mart, periodic ice, and a week or two off of it.

That seems like an expense a company that makes billions would go out of their way to avoid.

You're right. They would.

DarthDarthington wrote:

rachel wrote:

DarthDarthington wrote:

grmblfjx wrote:

PS Darth, is that Mr Morden?

Why yes, yes it is. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

And no pike? Tsk, tsk. I thought that was his best look.

Spoiler:

Why is there a picture of Susan Boyle here?

I don't understand. Is it not the consensus of the medical profession that cocaine is the cure-all painkiller? Why would a real man choose anything less?

Baron Chuddlington III wrote:

I don't understand. Is it not the consensus of the medical profession that cocaine is the cure-all painkiller? Why would a real man choose anything less?

You're thinking of morphine, Baron, or it's non-addictive counterpart, heroin. Furthermore, our Empress and Queen, Victoria, uses the cannabis to alleviate the pains of her unspeakable revolting female thing.

P.S. I'm glad you're back. Been squashing rebellions in the Raj?

Whatever happened to good, old-fashioned laudenum?