Walmart worker Joseph Casias, 29, can take heart from the fact that the company is highly “sympathetic” to his struggle with an inoperable brain tumor. The sympathy, however, did not prevent the company from firing him because he used legal medical marijuana to deal with the pain of the tumor.
Casias was fired in November from a Walmart store in Battle Creek, Mich., after marijuana was detected in a routine drug screening. He proceeded to show all of the records that he took the marijuana legally and there was never a complaint about his performance at work. He worked 12-14 hours a day.
Walmart spokesman Greg Rossiter told FoxNews.com “This is just an unfortunate situation all around.” Well a bit more unfortunate for Casias, wouldn’t you say? Rossiter add “We’re sympathetic to Mr. Casias’ condition, but like other companies, we have to consider the overall safety of our customers and associates, including Mr. Casias, when making a difficult decision like this.” So, this is a Walmart version of Reefer Madness.
Once again, I am not sure why Wal-Mart fights these fights (here) and reaffirms the global view of the company as one of the dark forces in the business world.
For the full story, click here.
Johnson v. Columbia Falls Aluminum Company LLC (2009) (unpublished decision)
Johnson, who was a satisfactory employee and whose terms and conditions of employment were governed by a collective bargaining agreement, initiated an action alleging that he was wrongfully terminated for testing positive, even though he was a qualified marijuana user under Montana’s state law. In rejecting all of his claims the court concluded:
“Johnson essentially claimed that [Columbia Falls Aluminum Company] violated the ADA and the [Montana Human Rights Act] when it failed to accommodate his medical marijuana use … However, the [Montana Marijuana Act] provides that an employer is not required to accommodate an employee’s use of medical marijuana … [A] failure to accommodate use of medical marijuana does not violate the MHRA or the ADA since an employer is not required to accommodate an employee’s use of medical marijuana.”
From the Healthcare Lawyer Blog (in Michigan)
“Employers who utilize drug testing programs, should uniformly enforce their policies for handling employees who test positive for marijuana. However, such policies should be amended to include how the Company is going to handle employees who test positive who are participants in the Medical Marijuana Program. Employers should treat positive outcomes consistently and uniformly.”
First of all one needs to know how to comprehend. Even if they can read they may not understand what it means.
sa·dism \ˈsā-ˌdi-zəm, ˈsa-\, n.,
1 : a sexual perversion in which gratification is obtained by the infliction of physical or mental pain on others (as on a love object) — compare masochism
2 a : delight in cruelty b : excessive cruelty
So how is promoting a corporate policy as being superior to state law and thereby denying a dying man comfort not simply sadism, but fascist sadism?
It’s not.
If the man in question were a pilot or a bus driver or some position where cogency is primary to protecting lives? Zero tolerance as a corporate policy not only makes sense, it should be the law.
However, he works at Wal-Mart.
I think one would have to be high just to show up and punch the clock, regardless of personal health issues.
Yep.
If Duh thinks I’m not showing restraint, then he doesn’t know me very well.
Could, would, should, outta be good?
Note the verb choice “could”.
I could, however, attack with abandon. I do carry a verbal flame thrower in my toolbox. It has been displayed here before. Ask Byron. If Duh thinks he’s being attacked, perhaps he’s feeling guilty about being sadistic toward the dying.
AY,
No, the pain is fine. The constant whine of “Boo hoo, poor attacked me” is simply getting old. He has opinions he can’t back up. That’d be his problem.
And yet you still haven’t answered the question of how wanting to deny a terminal patient a legal drug doesn’t make you a sadist.
Hmmmmm.
Me thinks Duh doth protest too much.
Buddha,
Just ignore it. Too many painkillers or not enough?
Duh,
You think THAT was an attack? Here’s some advice. Grow some skin. If I were actually attacking you? Your screen would melt.
Quit whining.
For some reason, I didn’t expect you would. 🙂
Duh,
I have to disagree. But there are certainly better and more finely skilled mind out there than mine. I don’t see personal attack.
AY,
When someone refers to another as a “sadist”, it’s a personal attack.
This is his opinion? It may not be mine. I have even agreed with you a time or two.
Duh,
How was this a personal attack? Help me?
Buddha,
How many times does one need to ask you to avoid personal attacks before you will comply? Do you consider it acceptable to enter another’s house and insulting their guests?
True, anon nurse.
To be able to think outside the box one must first be willing to think. Able to think is another matter altogether.
Washington state precedent even. Last time I checked Washington and Michigan are sovereign state.
So come on, explain how you taking the corporatist side of this argument doesn’t make you simply a sadist making a patient choose between treatment or employ.