Can I be fired for

Can I be fired for off-duty marijuana use in California?

For most employees, no. AB 2188 changed this on January 1, 2024, and many employers are still running the old playbook.

The Short Answer

Since January 1, 2024, AB 2188, codified at Government Code 12954, makes it a FEHA violation to punish employees for cannabis use away from work, or based on drug tests that detect only nonpsychoactive THC metabolites. SB 700 adds that employers cannot ask about your past cannabis use. Exceptions exist, and they are narrower than employers pretend.

What AB 2188 Protects

Off duty, off premises use, and hiring or firing decisions based on metabolite only test results.

The science in plain English: metabolites show past use, not present impairment. THC metabolites can linger for weeks after any effect has worn off. That is precisely why the law drew the line where it did.

What It Does Not Protect

Possession or impairment at work, and on duty use. None of that changed.

Then there are the carve outs, which is where most consultations land:

  • Building and construction trades
  • Positions requiring a federal background clearance
  • Employers bound by federal testing rules, including drivers regulated by the Department of Transportation

Deadlines. Claims under the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), the state’s main workplace discrimination law, run 3 years to file with the California Civil Rights Department, the state agency that handles discrimination complaints, then 1 year from the right to sue letter. Full deadline table

Two Different Tests, and Only One of Them Still Counts

This is the heart of the law, and it is the part employers get wrong most often, usually because nobody updated the drug testing contract.

Metabolite Screens

The standard urine panel looks for nonpsychoactive THC metabolites, which are what your body leaves behind after the effect is gone. They can show up long after use, and they say nothing about whether you were impaired on a Tuesday morning. Acting on this result alone is what the law now treats as a FEHA violation.

Impairment Evidence

Tests that identify active THC, and observed evidence that you were impaired at work, are a different matter entirely. Nothing in the law protects being under the influence on the job, and an employer is still entitled to act on that.

So the useful question after a positive test is not whether you used. It is what the test actually measured, and whether anyone observed anything at work at all. If the only evidence is a lab result from a panel that detects metabolites, the employer is standing on the part of the ground the legislature took away.

What SB 700 Added

AB 2188 dealt with testing. SB 700 dealt with the interview. An employer generally may not ask you about your prior cannabis use, which closes the obvious workaround of simply asking the question instead of running the test. It also means a job offer withdrawn after you answered honestly about the past is worth a conversation.

The Carve Outs, in Plain Terms

The exceptions are real. They are also narrower than the handbook usually claims, and the ones that bite tend to attach to the specific job rather than to the whole company.

  • Building and construction trades. Written into the statute directly.
  • Positions requiring a federal background investigation or security clearance. The trigger is the clearance requirement for that role, not the fact that the employer happens to hold federal contracts.
  • Testing required by federal law, regulation, or a condition of federal funding or contracting. Drivers regulated by the Department of Transportation are the example most people meet.

If your employer is relying on one of these, the question to ask is which one, and why it applies to your position specifically. A company wide zero tolerance policy is not itself an exception.

Medical Cannabis Is a Separate Question

People often arrive assuming a doctor’s recommendation settles it. It does not, and the two questions pull apart.

Off duty protection now applies to you the same way it applies to everyone else, and that is the stronger ground. Whether an employer has to accommodate medical cannabis use, as opposed to simply leaving your off duty life alone, is a different analysis that runs through disability accommodation rather than through AB 2188. Nothing in any of it protects use or impairment at work. If your situation turns on accommodation rather than on off duty use, say so early, because it changes which argument you are making.

If You Are Asked to Take a Test

  • Ask, in writing if you can, what is being tested for and who is administering it. The answer tells you which side of the line the employer is on.
  • Do not simply refuse. A refusal is usually treated as a positive result, and it hands the employer a reason that has nothing to do with cannabis.
  • Keep every piece of paper, including the consent form and the chain of custody documents.
  • Write down who told you, when, and what reason they gave, the same day.
  • If you hold a safety sensitive or federally regulated position, get advice before the test rather than after it.

What to Save

  • The drug testing policy as written, photographed from the handbook.
  • The test result itself, including which panel was run.
  • Any message explaining why you were tested, especially if it names a reason.
  • Your performance record from before the test.
  • The termination or rescission letter, with its date.
  • Copies kept somewhere that is not a company device or account.

Frequently Asked Questions

Does this cover medical marijuana at work?

No. Workplace impairment rules still stand, and AB 2188 did not change them.

Can a job offer be pulled over a pre-employment test?

Metabolite only screens in hiring fall under the same rule, exceptions aside.

I am a federal contractor employee.

That is carve out territory, and it is worth a consultation rather than a guess.

I failed a random test but I had not used in weeks.

That is the exact situation the law was written for. A standard panel can register long after any effect has passed, which is why a metabolite only result is no longer a lawful basis to act. Find out which test was run.

My employer says their policy is zero tolerance.

A policy cannot create an exception the statute does not contain. Plenty of handbooks still carry language written before the rule changed. The policy is evidence of what the employer believed, not of what the law allows.

I am in a union. Does my contract change this?

It can change the route rather than the right. A collective agreement may add a grievance process you have to use, and it may have its own deadlines that run faster than the statutory ones. Bring the contract to the consultation.

Does this cover CBD or hemp products?

Some products contain enough THC to register on a panel even when they are sold as something else. That does not change the analysis, because the question remains what the test measured and whether anyone observed impairment at work.

Employment Law Resources

Not sure how this applies to your situation? Talk it through with an employment lawyer. The call is free and confidential.

Tell Us What Happened

One business day for a response. You pay nothing unless we win.

I agree to receive calls and text messages from RMD Law about my inquiry. Message and data rates may apply. Consent is not a condition of representation.
100% confidential. We never contact your employer without your permission.