Philly workers can dispute their potential employer over marijuana testing. But do they know about it?

Philadelphia started forbidding employers within city limits from testing for marijuana use during the hiring process last year in hopes of improving employment opportunities for medicinal cannabis users.

When the ban went into effect in January 2022, it was unclear just how many of the city’s biggest employers would fully comply and how complaints would be investigated.

A year later, the Philadelphia Commission on Human Relations, which oversees implementation, says it received zero complaints over unlawful pre-hire marijuana testing in 2022. The commission’s community engagement campaign prioritized informing employers over prospective employees about their new rights.

The strategy raises an important question: How many people will complain about something if they don’t know they can?

This isn’t the first time a well-intentioned workplace law struggled to reach its intended audience: The city’s COVID-19 paid sick leave policy disproportionately burdens small businesses, while employees who work for larger firms fight for time off.

The ban works like this: Employers in Philadelphia can’t screen for marijuana use during the hiring process, but can test for cannabis alongside other substances after a candidate starts work. Safety-sensitive positions, such as those that involve working with children, are exempt from the law, as are jobs beholden to federal funding or connected to a union agreement that stipulates marijuana testing. Jobseekers can file complaints regarding wrongful testing via email with the commission. Employers are fined $300 per offense.

» READ MORE: What to know about Philadelphia’s ban on pre-hire marijuana testing

The human relations commission doesn’t preemptively investigate employers, executive director Kia Ghee said over email. “Instead, individuals who are subjected to unlawful pre-employment marijuana testing for non-exempt positions must file a complaint to trigger an investigation.”

Entrepreneur Damian Jorden runs Phynally, a Philadelphia-based job search platform that lists job openings that don’t require marijuana testing across the country. Jordan said the local ban led to an increase in interest from both job applicants and companies in the city. Now, he said, some local employers are looking to start enterprise accounts with Phynally, where the platform can show hundreds of their applicable openings to jobseekers.

Still, Jorden wonders just how many Philadelphians are aware of the law — or if they need to tell employers about medicinal marijuana use.

“No one has said anything about jobs or how to discuss cannabis use with employers,” Jorden said.

Ghee said PCHR “has been engaging and educating members of the public on this and other protections through various community events,” pointing to an employer outreach event that took place in April. The commission also worked on an FAQ for employers. Other than a section on the commission’s website, the department hasn’t done much targeted outreach for jobseekers, like collaborating with the city’s labor unions.

According to marijuana policy experts, that isn’t enough.

“There’s always room for more community engagement,” said Tauhid Chappell, the founder of the Philadelphia CannaBusiness Association who teaches a class on how to evaluate cannabis equity policies at Jefferson University. “It’s not a great strategy if you’re only going to do outreach for a small group of people and not the general public, which make up the working class.”

Chappell, who previously worked for The Inquirer, recommended PCHR form relationships with stakeholders that can reach Philadelphians in neighborhoods disproportionately impacted by antiquated drug policies, such as registered community organizations in Black and Latino communities and the Office of Reentry Partnerships, which works with formerly incarcerated residents to become financially stable.

Barbara Rittinger Rigo, a lawyer with the Philly labor and employment firm Littler Mendelson who represents employers, called the tally of zero complaints “very suspect.”

“It does make you question whether there’s enough information and education out there,” she said, but noted why the city would begin with employer outreach. “Employers are the ones who need to change their policies.”

Rigo also said that information about the ban should be a part of the process for procuring a medical marijuana card. There were more than 712,000 registered medical marijuana patients in Pennsylvania as of May.

Marijuana justice advocates are worried the low fine will water down the law’s impact in the long run.

Chappell said “$300 is too low” of a fine to encourage compliance from all of city’s businesses.

“Large companies and employers can get away with it,” he said. “I don’t think that’s enough incentive for these employers to adopt a new policy and be public about it.”

Fourteen states and Washington, D.C., have banned employers from discriminating against medical marijuana users, and in Nevada, employers are barred from refusing to hire someone solely because they failed a marijuana screening.

Rigo acknowledged that $300 is low, but “can certainly add up” as companies look to fill swaths of vacancies.

“My guess is if you’re going to commit a violation once, you’re doing it more than once,” she said.