Until a visiting Thatcher honoree informed me that Prop 19, while legalizing pot in the (once-)Golden State, would also make it difficult for employers to fire someone who toked a bit too much:
Prop 19 failed also because it overreached. One feature attempted to protect the “rights” of employees who get fired or disciplined for using marijuana, including a provision that employers could only discipline marijuana use that “actually impairs job performance.” That is a much higher bar than required by current policy.
Commenting on this, Walter Olson observes
Like so many other developments in employment law in recent years, this would have chipped away at the basic principle of employment at will, which holds that in the absence of a contract specifying otherwise, either party to an employment relation may end that relation at any time for any reason or for no reason at all.
Via Instapundit. So, while the law may have removed one barrier to our freedom, it created another. Just as individuals should be free to smoke marijuana, so should employers be free to ensure that their employees don’t.
It seems that the initiative’s authors, like many on the left, only understood the idea of freedom in personal terms, not economic ones. Let us hope that, in future years, they put forward a proposition which recognizes both an individual’s freedom to toke and a company’s freedom to set its own employment policies.