News

New Recreational Marijuana Laws: What You Need to Know

 

In recent events, recreational Marijuana laws are changing despite harsher federal laws put back into place or introduced by Jefferson Sessions, Attorney General. Sessions has reintroduced mandatory minimums, directing federal prosecutors to give the most severe penalties possible for crimes, including those that are drug-related. Furthermore, tougher sentences will be given to those growing, selling, or smoking Marijuana, which is a part of The Task Force on Crime Reductions and Public Safety’s reassessment report of federal Marijuana policies. The report is expected to release later this week on July 27th. Sessions has been a long-time advocate against Marijuana as he ties the drug together with violent crime.  

 

Yet, several states have begun loosening their laws on marijuana. In 2016, up to 8 states lessened their Marijuana laws, while 4 states legalized the use of the drug for those who are 21 years of age and older. What prohibits drug use is quickly and frequently changing after the past election, and Pre-Check is sharing what you NEED to know:

 

In Massachusetts, residents can now grow up to 12 Marijuana plants and possess up to 10 ounces in their homes. Retails sales are claimed to soon be in the mix.

 

In California, recreational use on private property is now legal, but limitations do still apply.  There is no system in place for selling the drug, which means that it must be shared FREE by those who grow it. Come January of next year, retail laws are said to be put into place.

 

In Maine, adults can now possess up to 2.5 ounces, however, retail laws are not going to be finalized until January of next year. Some parts of Maine are claiming to be “dry towns”, in an effort to keep retail sales out of that domain.

 

In Nevada, Marijuana is legal to use on private property but, is still illegal to sell at this point.

 

In other states such as, Alaska, Oregon, Colorado, District of Columbia and Washington, adults 21 and older can use the drug. However, there are limitations to these areas as well.

 

In Ohio, it is rumored that more loosely grappled laws around medicinal Marijuana use will soon take shape. But nothing is yet guaranteed.

 

While some states have made Marijuana drug use legal in certain parts, it is still a very far distance away from becoming completely legalized with little to no limitations or restrictions. Employers: Despite the varying rules put into place for these states it should be noted that use of Marijuana in the workplace can still be disciplined as it can affect performance and cause several other issues.

 

Pre-Check recommends one of our thorough and accurate drug tests to regularly test both your current employees and new-hires. We provide both urine and hair testing, while hair tests offer the most accurate results.

 

Would you like to learn more about our drug testing services? Get in touch with us at info@pre-check.com.

 

/ Print
Posted by Sandra Shinn in General

Comments


Be the first to comment
Name*
E-mail*
Website
Comment*
0 Pending Comments
 Keep me updated of follow-up comments!
Most Recent

By Sandra Shinn
October 17, 2017 Category • General

This blog has been written by Roy Maurer of SHRM. Pre-Check is re-posting it with permission. Roy Maurer | roy.maurer@shrm.org Employers that conduct background screens need to keep up as states expand the types ofcriminal records eligible for sealing or expungement. Mayor Muriel Bowser of Washington, D.C., recently proposed to wipe clean the arrest records of people who were not later convicted. Her plan joins a spate of efforts dubbed second chance or clean slate bills that would limit employers access to criminal records of arrests without convictions, minor misdemeanors and even low-level felonies, to improve ex-offenders job prospects. Most states allow for criminal records to be sealed or expunged, although laws vary by state. Some states do not permit expungement, or they allow expungement under very limited circumstances. Dealing with sealed or expunged records can be tricky for employers conducting background screens because of differences in state laws and the

By Sandra Shinn
October 04, 2017 Category • General

In the latter half of 2016, the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) issued changes to the Ban the Box rule, which included prohibiting agencies and employers from inquiring about an applicants criminal history until the agency or employer has made a conditional offer of employment to the applicant. Ban the Box quite literally refers to removing the box on job applications asking if the applicant has a criminal record. Now, the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) has created guidelines that Human Resources agencies and hiring managers must comply with. Employee Protection from Discrimination Under the Civil Service Law, employees are protected from discrimination based on conduct that does not adversely affect their job performance. However, agencies and hiring managers can take convictions into account when determining an applicants suitability for a job. A conviction that has no bearing on job duties or performance may not be the basis for discrimination for or against anyone. Requesting

By Sandra Shinn
September 21, 2017 Category • General

Employers: Have you heard about the Ohio Houses House Bill 187? Its proposal is to protect the privacy of employment applicants; however, it could also make the hiring just a little bit trickier you. House Bill 187: According to 2017 BARNES THORNBURG LLP, House Bill 187 provides that no employer may request an applicants Social Security Number, date of birth, or drivers license number before making an offer of employment. The Problem: You might already see why this new bill could be frustrating for employers. These are the key pieces of information employers and Consumer Reporting Agencies (CRAs) use to check criminal records, driving history, credit history, previous employment, and more. The bill does state that an employer may obtain information for these background screening reasons, but this is unrealistic because it forbids employers from providing this information to third parties, like us. If House Bill 187 becomes law, employers will undoubtedly have to begin