Medical Marijuana and the Workplace

April 24, 2023

The landscape surrounding the use of marijuana is ever changing as of late. Each state currently has different laws regarding the use of medical and recreational marijuana. Although your state may have legalized medical and/or recreational marijuana, it remains illegal at the Federal level. This poses a challenge for employers, especially those with locations and employees in separate states.


Today, employers are permitted to make rules prohibiting drug and alcohol use in the workplace. Employers do not have to tolerate on-site drug and alcohol use in general. When it comes to off-site use, there are limited accommodations that are required to be granted for alcohol and drug use in relation to disabilities. Off-site medical marijuana use is one of those exceptions.


In Barbuto v. Advantage Sales and Marketing, LLC, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) held that an employee who uses medical marijuana may claim handicap discrimination against an employer for failing to waive mandatory drug testing for marijuana use absent an undue hardship to the employer’s business. (Note that the use of medical and recreational marijuana is legal in Massachusetts)


In Barbuto, an employee with Crohn’s disease was fired for a positive marijuana test following urine testing mandated by their employer. The employee had a medical marijuana card and requested accommodation of off-site use of marijuana for her disability.


The court held that an employee who uses medicinal marijuana off site and in a manner that does not interfere with job responsibilities cannot be terminated.


The Barbuto decision does not apply to on or off-site use of recreational marijuana. The employee was able to prevail because they were using medical marijuana for an underlying disability: Crohn’s disease.


Employers can still discipline/terminate employees who use recreational marijuana, whether on- or off-site. However, there are states that have prohibited employees being treated adversely for any marijuana use, including California and Washington D.C. You may start to see the laws in some New England states change to conform with these states. Be careful to stay abreast of any changes in the law.


If your business has any questions on this topic or any other matters, please do not hesitate to contact the attorneys at The Royal Law Firm at 413-586-2288.

Brandon Calton admitted to the United States District Court of Connecticut

June 10, 2025
Brandon Calton is now admitted to the United States District Court, Connecticut! The Royal Law Firm is passionate about expanding our reach so that we can better serve our clients and their needs. Brandon is admitted in Massachusetts, the United States District Court of Massachusetts, and the United States District Court of Connecticut.

Federal Court Vacates EEOC’s “Abortion Accommodation Mandate” in PWFA

By Heather Child • June 9, 2025
On May 21, 2025, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana struck down a provision in the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s (EEOC) final rule under the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA), ruling that the agency exceeded its authority by requiring employers to accommodate elective abortions that are not medically necessary. Background Information: In June 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which overturned Roe v. Wade and eliminated the constitutional right to abortion. Congress passed the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act in December 2022, and it became effective in June 2023. The law requires employers with 15 or more employees to provide reasonable accommodation to qualified applicants or employees who have physical or mental conditions related to pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions, unless doing so would cause significant difficulty or expense for the employer. In April 2024, The EEOC issued its final interpretation of the PWFA including abortion in the definition of “pregnancy, childbirth, or other related medical conditions” thereby requiring employers to provide accommodations related to abortion. In May 2024, the states of Mississippi and Louisiana sued the EEOC, arguing that the interpretation conflicted with the U.S. Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision and their respective state laws on abortion. In June 2024, Judge Joseph found that the EEOC exceeded its authority and issued a preliminary injunction postponing the effective date of the interpretation to provide accommodation for elective abortions until final judgment was entered in this matter. The final judgment was entered on May 21, 2025, that remanded the matter to the EEOC to revise the final rule and all related implementing regulations and guidances. Employer Takeaways: While employers are no longer (as of now) REQUIRED to provide accommodation for elective abortions, the remainder of the PWFA remains in full effect The decision to have or not have an abortion remains protected under Title VII The PWFA does not supersede state or local laws providing greater protection for pregnant workers. It is important to stay up to date on state regulations to ensure employers are complying with state laws. While it is still unclear how this ruling will impact employers nationwide, it is still important to continue to stay up to date on ever-changing legislation.  If your business has any questions on this topic or any other matters, please do not hesitate to contact the attorneys at The Royal Law Firm at 413-586-2288.