Ongoing Marijuana Legalization Impacts Job Prospects Even for Non-Users

By Michael Klazema on 4/12/2018

As supporters in states across the country celebrate the legalization of medical and recreational marijuana, employers face a need to grapple with what this means for their hiring practices. Those who wish to legally use marijuana also wonder what these changes mean for their ability to seek employment. As it turns out, even associating with legal marijuana can have consequences. 

Mindful of the fact that cannabis remains illegal at the federal level, and unsure of the potential liability they might face, many employers have chosen to maintain zero-tolerance policies. Some have made changes out of necessity, while others have called for clarification of confusing regulations. What is clear is the changing social attitude on marijuana creates a complex situation in the business world. 

Outside of business, legal cannabis has impacted individuals who have little to no personal association with the drug. Such was the case when a Colorado student hoping for a shot on the baseball team at Wesleyan received a terse email from the coach denying him outright based on his state of origin. The reasoning: Colorado students failed drug tests due to marijuana use, so the coach made the decision not to spend time vetting any more CO residents. The story made headlines rapidly, and ultimately resulted in the coach's firing. Wesleyan termed the coach's response "discriminatory."

This problem – guilt by association" with legal marijuana – can follow those who've worked in cannabis cultivation or sales, too. After confirming an applicant's employment history, hiring managers may find themselves wary about ordering a drug test for an applicant they feel is certain to fail for marijuana usage even though working with cannabis as a product is no guarantee of personal usage. 

Many drug tests, including those available through, screen for other drugs besides marijuana. Employers who wish to overlook an applicant's personal use can still ensure no other, harder drugs are in the individual's system. Such tests won't go away anytime soon since, according to recent surveys, a majority of Americans still support pre-employment drug testing. As more states consider decriminalization and legalization, how businesses and organizations choose to handle drug testing policies may need to change.

That has been the case with the Seattle Police Department. Until very recently, the PD's policy was that an applicant to become an officer must not have used marijuana for at least three years prior. With Washington State's legalization of the drug, the department found itself in a position where its policies needed a revision. Today, applicants must not have used the drug within one year of their application date. In legal states like Colorado, where low unemployment numbers put labor at a premium, many employers are also finding they must reconsider rejecting individuals based on their usage.

For now, marijuana users remain unprotected due to the substance's Schedule I status at the federal level, and businesses may still deny employment based on any drug use, including legal cannabis. To aid in making employment determinations in accordance with relevant state and federal guidelines for fair practices, can provide your company both with drug screening services and a comprehensive background check that can reveal drug-related convictions. With the cloudy legal situation surrounding marijuana usage, such levels of clarity can be very helpful in your hiring processes.


Additional source used for update:

Tag Cloud
Recent Posts

Latest News

  • July 17 — Hourly Employee Screening: What Makes It Unique and Important infographic?Modern employers conduct background checks on most of the people they hire. These checks are most often used to screen full-time salaried workers. Part-timers and hourly employees are typically less likely to face a thorough background check or even go through a background screening at all. According to a survey conducted by, 67 percent of employers screen all of their part-time employees, compared to 83 percent of their full-time employees.
  • July 17 A Kentucky school district recently decided to stop paying for volunteer background checks. Going forward, volunteers will be expected to cover the cost of their own checks, which is $10 per person.
  • July 12 Seeking fresh employees for businesses, some states seek to reduce the number of people denied employment based on old or nonviolent crimes.
  • July 11 Multinational aerospace company - Safran Group - trusts to screen new hires, The products they manufacture can have major implications for aircraft safety and worldwide security. As such, the company needs to be extremely careful and deliberate about who it trusts to join the organization.
  • July 11 Recently cited for driving too fast? Here’s what a speeding ticket will do to your background check report.
  • July 10

    Could your business be vulnerable to employee theft? Protect yourself with more thorough background checks.

  • July 09 While Social Security Numbers aren’t required for criminal history checks, they can be beneficial. Here’s why.
  • July 05

    In June, Chicago Public Schools came under fire after a Chicago Tribune piece accused the district of not protecting students from sexual abusers. The district has announced plans to run background checks on all employees.

  • July 04 — How important are volunteer background checks? Do they even matter?
    Organizations that rely in part on volunteer labor consistently find themselves asking these questions. The assumption is usually that volunteer background checks are less important than background checks for full-time or part-time employees. According to a CareerBuilder survey from 2016, 72 percent of employers conduct background checks on all employees. A parallel statistic isn’t even available for volunteer checks. They are less common – and less valued.
  • July 03 #MeToo harassment allegations continue to reshape workplaces in every industry. As a result, many companies are looking to safeguard themselves from liability.