SAN DIEGO (KGTV) — Starting next week, a new California law prevents most employers from punishing workers who use marijuana when they are off the clock.
But if you look closely at Assembly Bill 2188, you'll see a certain group is not included: construction workers.
"If they're calling it a discrimination bill, I don't know how you can pick one group of people and still say it's OK to discriminate against them," Dominic Larson said.
Larson is a glazier and says he is often drug-tested before performing a job.
"I want to be able to smoke off the clock."
Larson likes the premise behind the marijuana anti-discrimination bill but doesn't get why he can't partake.
The bill was first introduced in February of 2022 as a way to regulate the drug testing methods employers use when making employment decisions. That version of the bill didn't include the construction trades exemption.
But by the time it was first amended less than two months later in April 2022, the exemption was added.
It wasn't adjusted in any other amendments before it was signed into law.
An assembly bill policy committee analysis published in April 2022 described the opposition to the bill, arguing against construction worker inclusion in the anti-discrimination law.
The analysis says, "Testing protects other employees, the workplace’s equipment, and members of the public. This is particularly important in workplaces with heavy equipment or vehicles, such as manufacturing or construction, where a mistake can result in catastrophe."
Larson says the length of time marijuana stays in a person's system is not indicative of whether they are under the influence on the job.
"If they're only doing urine tests or saliva tests, then that can stay in your system for so long that they're really testing what you did weeks ago. They're not testing what you did that day."
ABC 10News reached out to a contact for former Rep. Bill Quirk, who sponsored the bill. Quirk did not seek re-election and is no longer in office. The contact has not responded.
Larson says he'd like to hire an attorney to sue the state over the law, but claims he hasn't found an attorney willing to take his case.
"I'm not allowed to do what anybody else in this state can now do, and if if there's a legit [sic] reason for it, I would like the state to explain why I'm so much different than an Amazon driver.
