Royal

Connecticut Passes Law Legalizing Cannabis

July 1, 2021

Connecticut passed a new law legalizing cannabis. Effective July 1, 2021, individuals will be able to lawfully possess, use, and consume recreational cannabis.


Smoking Restrictions

The law contains provisions restricting smoking that will affect employers. These provisions will go into effect October 1, 2021.

All employers must ban smoking and the use of electronic nicotine and cannabis vaping products in any area of their facility. Employers can no longer designate a smoking room for employees. The law applies to the inside of buildings as well as 25 feet from any doorway, window, or vent. Exceptions are limited and include tobacco or cannabis research facilities and specific licensed establishments. Employers also have the option to designate their entire property as a nonsmoking area.


Employment-Related Provisions

Another section of the law contains several provisions that will affect employers and their employment policies. These provisions will be effective July 1, 2022.


  • Employers can implement policies prohibiting the use of cannabis by employees, except for qualified patients under the state’s medical marijuana laws. Any such policy must be in writing and be made available to employees and prospective employees before it goes into effect.


  • Employers cannot terminate or take any adverse action against an employee because the employee uses cannabis outside the workplace, except when an employer has an established policy in place. 


  • Employers cannot terminate or take any adverse action against an employee or prospective employee for using cannabis prior to employment, unless it would put the employer in violation of a federal contract. 


  • The law affirms that employers have the right to maintain a drug and alcohol-free workplace and that employers may take adverse action when they have a reasonable suspicion of an employee’s cannabis use while working or when an employee shows “specific, articulable symptoms” of cannabis use while working. 


  • Employers can terminate or take adverse action against an employee after a positive drug test if the employer has a reasonable suspicion the employee is using cannabis at work, if the testing was part of an established random drug testing policy, or if the testing was for a prospective employee with a conditional job offer.


Certain employers are exempt, including: mining, utilities, construction, manufacturing, transportation/delivery, educational services, healthcare or social services, and justice, public order, and safety activities.


The law also exempts certain employee positions, including: firefighters, EMTs, police officers, positions requiring operation of a motor vehicle that requires drug testing under state or federal law, positions requiring certification of completion of a course in construction safety and health approved by OSHA, positions requiring supervision or care of children, medical patients or vulnerable persons, positions for which the law would conflict with federal law, positions funded by a federal grant, or if the provisions would conflict with an employment contract or collective bargaining agreement, and positions that an employer determines have the potential to adversely impact the health or safety of employees or the public.


Individuals aggrieved by an employer’s violation of the law can bring a civil action in superior court and may be awarded reinstatement their job or job offer, back pay, and attorney’s fees.

 

For any questions or concerns about this new Connecticut law, please contact the attorneys at The Royal Law Firm at 413-586-2288.

February 19, 2025
The Massachusetts Superior Court found that Massachusetts’ wiretap statue does not bar employers from using allegedly illegally obtained recordings in civil proceedings. In a recent case, an employee claimed she was forced to resign. Plaintiff’s coworker recorded an argument between the Plaintiff and her supervisor without her consent and shared it with supervisors. The employee then sued for discrimination and retaliation, along with two counts for violation of the wiretap statute. Massachusetts is a two-party consent state but, in this case, it was found that the consent of only one party was needed because nothing in the Wiretap Statute bars the use of an allegedly illegally obtained communication in a civil proceeding. The court found that the provisions about the use of illegally obtained communications in evidence are limited to criminal trials. However, depending on the court, results may differ, as this recording was central to proving and/or disproving the Plaintiff’s claim, and as such, the recording was indispensable as a piece of evidence. Issues with unauthorized recordings have been arising all the time in civil proceedings because recording devices are everywhere, whether they be a cell phone, laptop or other recording device. This ruling is good for employers, as if there is an otherwise inadmissible recording that is made that disproves an employee’s claims, it can be admissible as evidence if meets the same scenario above. However, employers must be careful to use these recordings as they may be inadmissible and may not show the same thing that the employer believes in the court’s eyes. This being said, it is prudent to consult an attorney before utilizing a recording for any employment action or in legal action to avoid unwanted consequences. 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.
February 14, 2025
What Are the Compliance Requirements for Private Employers?
Share by: