Skip to content

Countdown to Cannabis: A Stewart McKelvey Newsletter: The legalization of cannabis: 7 reasons why employers should take notice

Brian G. Johnston, QC

Cannabis legalization is coming. The legislation is expected to pass by July with legalization becoming effective by September.

Employers should take notice because:

1. There is already a lot of cannabis in Canada

Cannabis use in Canada is amongst the highest in the world, and the highest amongst all nations for youth consumption.

According to an EKOS survey (September 2016), 58% of Canadians have used cannabis as least once in their lifetime; 22% have used in the past 12 months; and, 5% use daily. Statistics Canada reported that, in 2017, about 4.9 million Canadians used cannabis.

Statistics Canada estimated that, at $8 per gram, the 2017 illegal Canadian market for cannabis was $5.6 billion – about 50% of the $9.2 billion Canadian beer market and 70% of the $7 billion Canadian wine market.

Cannabis use has a high level of social acceptability. Approximately 48% of Canadians agree that cannabis use is acceptable and consider that it poses less of a health risk than alcohol (41% to 49%).

Cannabis consumption is rising amongst older Canadians. By 2015, two thirds of the market was individuals older than 24 years of age.

2. More cannabis to come with legalization

Next to British Columbia, Atlantic Canadians have the highest level of support for legalization (41%) and the lowest opposition to it (35%). Nova Scotians are already Canada’s highest per capita consumers.

Use amongst working age adults is expected to increase with legalization. Some estimate that use will almost double to about 40% of Canadians (alcohol is consumed by nearly 80% of Canadians).

In Colorado, one study reports that cannabis legalization resulted in a 71% increase in the average past month use for adults 26 years of age and over (compared to a 16% increase for college aged individuals).

3. Cannabis is addictive

Cannabis is addictive. The lifetime risk of addiction is 9% versus 15% for alcohol and 32% for tobacco. The cannabis addiction rate is 17% of those who start as teenagers and 25-50% of those who smoke cannabis daily.

4. Cannabis impairs

Cannabis is different from alcohol – the effects of cannabis are more subtle and longer lasting. THC, the chemical compound in cannabis responsible for a euphoric high, is stored in the brain and fatty cells and released over time. It has a long half-life.

The duration and extent of impairment is impacted by variations in strain, crop and manufacturer; size of the joint or cookie; the depth of inhalation; and, interaction with other substances. When ingested orally, there is a lower and longer-delayed peak THC concentration.

According to a 2015 World Health Organization study, “there is ample evidence indicating that neurocognitive impairment from cannabis persists from hours to weeks. A return to a non-intoxicated state does not ensure a full return of neurocognitive function in the workplace …ensuring safety of workers who are under the influence or who recently consumed cannabis is not possible.”

5. Operating a motor vehicle – risky

The effects of cannabis on motor vehicle operation is an obvious concern.

There is a direct dose relationship between driving ability and blood THC concentration which gives rise to impairment in judgment, motor coordination, and reaction time. There is no “low risk” level of use that has been established. Dosage is difficult to determine when cannabis is smoked.

The Canadian Medical Association’s Driver’s Guide recommends abstinence from driving within five hours of smoking a single joint.

Health Canada says that the ability to drive safely and operate equipment can be impaired for more than 24 hours after cannabis use.

The Canadian Medical Association noted increased cannabis-related traffic deaths following legalization in Colorado, where cannabis-related traffic deaths increased 66% in the four-year period post-legalization, compared to the last four-year period pre-legalization.

The Final Report of the Task Force on Cannabis Legalization and Regulation in Canada (the McLellan Report) acknowledged “there is currently no evidence to suggest there is an amount of THC that can be consumed such that it remains safe to drive.”

6. The problem of residual impairment – hours to days to weeks

According to the Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, the physiological effects of cannabis on neuro-cognitive performance can range from several hours to more than 28 days of subsequent abstinence.

The Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine says that, given that inhaled THC may impair complex human performance for more than 24 hours after ingestion, employers should not assume that [cannabis] use between shifts (such as evening use before return to work the following morning) is uniformly safe.

7. Occupational health and safety legislation – the risk to the workplace and to employers

Legislation mandates a safe workplace.

“Studies have linked [cannabis] use directly with an increased prevalence of workplace injury.” US postal workers who tested positive for cannabis on a pre-employment urine drug test had 55% more industrial accidents, 85% more injuries, and 75% higher absenteeism rate, compared with those who tested negative.”

Employers have to exercise due diligence with respect to health and safety risks.

In R v. Metron Construction Corp., 2013 ONCA 541, “three of the four deceased, including the site supervisor Fazilov, had marijuana in their systems at a level consistent with having recently ingested the drug.” The Court found that the supervisor had failed to take reasonable steps to prevent bodily harm and death by “permitting persons under the influence of a drug to work on the project”. The employer was fined $750,000. In a subsequent court action, the project manager was jailed for 3 ½ years (R. v. Kazenelson, 2018 ONCA 77).


This update is intended for general information only. If you have questions about the above information, please contact Brian G. Johnston, QC, or another member of our labour and employment group.

SHARE

Archive

Search Archive


 
 

TTC’s Random Testing Decision: A Bright Light for Employers in the Haze of Marijuana Legalization

April 11, 2017

Rick Dunlop In my December 15, 2016 article, Federal Government’s Cannabis Report: What does it mean for employers?, I noted the Report’s1 suggestion that there was a lack of research to reliably determine when individuals are impaired…

Read More

Unionization in the Construction Industry: Vacation Day + Snapshot Rule = Disenfranchisement

April 4, 2017

Rick Dunlop and Michelle Black On March 14, 2014, CanMar Contracting Limited (“CanMar”) granted a day off to two of its hard working and longer serving employees so they could spend time with their respective families. That…

Read More

Sometimes a bad deal is just a bad deal: unconscionability and insurance claim settlements in Downer v Pitcher, 2017 NLCA 13

March 16, 2017

Joe Thorne and Meaghan McCaw The doctrine of unconscionability is an equitable remedy available in exceptional circumstances where a bargain between parties, be it a settlement or a release, may be set aside on the basis that…

Read More

Privilege Prevails: Privacy Commissioner protects solicitor-client communications

March 16, 2017

Jonathan Coady After more than five years, the Prince Edward Island Information and Privacy Commissioner (the “Privacy Commissioner”) has completed her review into more than sixty records withheld by a local school board on the…

Read More

The Latest in Labour Law: A Stewart McKelvey Newsletter – Nova Scotia Teachers Union & Government – a synopsis

March 7, 2017

Peter McLellan, QC & Richard Jordan Introduction On February 21, 2017 the Nova Scotia Government passed Bill 75 – the Teachers’ Professional Agreement and Classroom Improvement (2017) Act. This Bulletin will provide some background to what is, today,…

Read More

Scotia Mortgage Corporation v Furlong: The Supreme Court of Newfoundland and Labrador weighs in on the former client rule in commercial transactions

March 1, 2017

Bruce Grant, QC and Justin Hewitt In the recent decision of Scotia Mortgage Corporation v Furlong1 the Supreme Court of Newfoundland and Labrador confirmed that where a law firm acts jointly for the borrower and lender in the placement…

Read More

The Ordinary Meaning of Insurance: Client Update on the SCC’s Decision in Sabean

February 21, 2017

The Supreme Court of Canada released its decision in Sabean v Portage La Prairie Mutual Insurance Co, 2017 SCC 7 at the end of January, finally answering an insurance policy question that had divided the lower…

Read More

Client Update: Outlook for the 2017 Proxy Season

February 8, 2017

In preparing for the 2017 proxy season, you should be aware of some regulatory changes and institutional investor guidance that may impact disclosure to, and interactions with, your shareholders. This update highlights what is new…

Read More

Client Update: The Future of Planning and Development on Prince Edward Island – Recent Amendments to the Planning Act

January 23, 2017

Perlene Morrison and Hilary Newman During the fall 2016 legislative sitting, the Province of Prince Edward Island passed legislation that results in significant changes to the Planning Act. The amendments received royal assent on December 15, 2016 and…

Read More

Plaintiffs’ medical reports – disclosure obligations in Unifund Assurance Company v. Churchill, 2016 NLCA 73

January 10, 2017

Joe Thorne1 and Justin Hewitt2 In Unifund Assurance Company v Churchill,3  the Newfoundland and Labrador Court of Appeal considered the application of our rules of court and the common law as they relate to disclosure of documents produced in…

Read More

Search Archive


Scroll To Top