GOING TO POT

On the surface, most people reading about a recent court decision
might be forgiven for wondering "what has that judge been smoking?"

But that would be wrong.

I'm not a betting person, but if I were I'd bet a lot of money that
Alberta Court of Queen's Bench Justice Sheilah Martin has never
smoked marijuana (which is a good thing, but bare with me).

Why? Because if she had smoked marijuana she'd know that doing so is
NOT a disability -- it's a choice, akin to eating a piece of cake, or
not. (Of course, if someone's smoked a joint, chances are, they'd
have two pieces of cake!)

In a ruling first handed down on May 11, but only brought to the
public's attention this week through media attention, Justice Martin
overturned an earlier Alberta Hu-man Rights and Citizenship Commission ruling.

In essence, Justice Martin ruled, that casual pot smoking is a
"disability," and firing someone who tested positive for the active
ingredient in marijuana in a pre-employment urine test is
discriminatory under Alberta's Human Rights laws, on that basis.

Justice Martin ruled Kellogg Brown & Root -- a company operating in
Fort McMurray -- discriminated against John Chiasson when it fired
him from his oilsands' job after he tested positive for marijuana in
a pre-employment drug test.

No, you did not read this wrong.

You are not having a drug-induced flashback causing massive misunderstanding.

A Justice has ruled that a company that operates in a highly
industrialized and dangerous environment is not allowed to screen out
and fire drug users in their employ.

In her 37-page ruling, Justice Martin reveals that Chiasson was
interviewed by KBR -- the engineering and construction arm of
Halliburton -- on June 25, 2002.

He received a letter dated June 26, confirming his employment with
the proviso that he pass a drug test, which took place on June 28.

On July 8, Chiasson started work as a receiving inspector at
Syncrude's plant near Fort McMurray.

However, on July 17, the results of Chiasson's pre-employment drug
test came back positive for THC (the active ingredient in marijuana.)
Chiasson admitted that he had smoked marijuana on Saturday, June 22
- -- six days before the test.

So, essentially, this case comes down to this. Is it fair to fire
someone in a potentially dangerous job who uses illegal drugs on
their own time?

The court says no, my guess is most Canadians would disagree.

According to the ruling, Chiasson's job included "safely operating a
motor vehicle in an extremely congested and inherently dangerous,
heavy equipment environment, as well as physical dexterity in
inspecting load material.

The complainant was also required to inspect critical material such
as pressure vessels for flaws or shipping damage."

It's important to point out that Chiasson "was never impaired at
work, there were no reported accidents or incidents and the written
evaluation of his performance while at KBR place him in the above
average to outstanding range."

This all muddies the water a bit to be sure.

As does KBR's incomprehensible policy of putting people to work
before the results of the drug test come back.

If someone's job is dangerous and drug testing is necessary, as KBR
states, then allowing someone to start work prior to test results
being known, calls into question its "claim that such testing is
essential and that Mr. Chiasson worked in a safety-sensitive position."

"The policy imposes a pre-employment barrier, with zero tolerance,
automatic termination and no accommodation," wrote Justice Martin.

But let's suppose that KBR had made "accommodation" for a casual pot
smoker's circumstances, as Justice Martin ruled it must.

And let's suppose that sometime in the future there was a serious
accident at the plant involving said person harming or accidentally
killing others.

Wouldn't that open KBR up to increased liability for making such an
"accommodation?" Most reasonable people would say yes to that.

And so, here we go again. Rights trump responsibility and common
sense goes up in smoke.