• mobyduck648@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    3 hours ago

    Is that not protected under anti-disability discrimination legislation in the US?

    I’m on medical cannabis in the UK, while our system is not set up for it at all if an employer took umbrage with it for a non-operational reason (such as operating heavy machinery vs being on it at all) that’d be a fairly open and shut disability discrimination case. Same as if you fired an employee for being on tramadol or similar.

      • mobyduck648@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Christ, how does that work with your doctors being way more keen to prescribe narcotics than ours then? Is it literally a case of follow your doctor’s orders or your boss’s? That’s fucked up.

        • PolarKraken@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          23 minutes ago

          Side note update for you, thanks to the Sacklers and the hell on earth they visited on us via profiteering lying about the opiates they invented, now there’s actually a gigantic back swing and it’s WAY more difficult to be prescribed strong pain relief, even when badly needed. Count on us to always come up with the worst possible response to a problem, I guess.

        • Lyrl@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 hour ago

          Prescribed narcotics would be OK as long as related doctor or company restrictions on operating heavy equipment or such were complied with. But in the US marijuana is still federally illegal. The feds usually don’t seek out prosecutions where states have legalized at the state level, but banks won’t accept business accounts if marijuana is sold because of the federal illegality, and businesses involving heavy machinery generally also still feel the legal risk of explicitly allowing marijuana use is too high.