The EMS and public safety community has struggled with its workplace policies and practices as the legalization of both medical and recreational marijuana has spread across the U.S. For years, many employers have relied on their workplaces being subject to the Drug Free Workplace Act or because their employees are performing safety-sensitive work. Several states have laws that specifically protect an employee’s off duty use of cannabis.

In December 2024, in a pivotal decision likely to influence workplace drug policies across Florida and the U.S., a Florida state court has ruled in favor of a firefighter who was placed on unpaid leave after testing positive for marijuana—despite having a valid medical marijuana card. The case, Angelo Giambrone v. Hillsborough County, signals a shift in how Florida employers must handle off-duty use of legally prescribed medical cannabis by employees with disabilities. Giambrone v. Hillsborough County, No. 20-CA-4719 (Fla. 13th Cir. Ct. Dec. 10, 2024).

Background

Angelo Giambrone, a firefighter/EMT with Hillsborough County since 2009, was subjected to a random drug screening in early 2019. After testing positive for marijuana, Giambrone disclosed that he was a registered medical marijuana patient, legally using cannabis to treat anxiety, PTSD, and insomnia.

Despite no evidence of impairment or use while on duty, Hillsborough County placed Giambrone on unpaid leave, citing its Drug-Free Workplace Policy and collective bargaining agreement (CBA). The County reported Giambrone’s positive drug test to the county EMS oversight agency who investigated and closed the case due to no finding or restriction to his certification. Giambrone subsequently filed suit under the Florida Civil Rights Act (FCRA) and for breach of contract, arguing that the County discriminated against him and failed to accommodate his lawful medical use of marijuana.

During the legal proceedings, both Giambrone and the County acknowledged that there were no performance issues or suspicions of on-duty cannabis use or possession while on duty. The County acknowledged that Giambrone had been promoted during his tenure with the Fire Department and that the sole reason he was drug tested was due to their random drug testing policy.

Court’s Findings

The judge in Florida’s Thirteenth Judicial Circuit granted summary judgment in Giambrone’s favor on all four counts:

1. Disability Discrimination (FCRA): The court found that Giambrone qualified as a person with a disability under the FCRA and that Hillsborough County failed to reasonably accommodate his lawful, off-duty medical marijuana use.
2. Wrongful Discharge: The County’s decision to place Giambrone on unpaid leave violated his rights under Florida law and did not align with its own personnel policies because their drug testing policies broadly included drugs and medications authorized under federal or Florida law.
3. Policy Violations: The County had not updated its Drug-Free Workplace Policy to account for lawful medical marijuana use, even though it accommodated other prescribed medications that could affect alertness.
4. Breach of Contract: Hillsborough County breached the CBA and its own policies by penalizing Giambrone solely on the basis of a positive test, without evidence of impairment or improper use on duty and regardless of drug or medication type.

Key Legal Takeaways for Employers from this Ruling

• Medical marijuana must be treated like any other legally prescribed medication in Florida workplaces, so long as its use does not affect performance or safety on the job.
• Employers must engage in an interactive process to assess whether reasonable accommodation is possible when employees present a valid medical marijuana prescription.
• Drug-free workplace policies must be updated to reflect the protections offered under Florida’s medical marijuana laws and disability rights statutes.

The court awarded Giambrone back pay, emotional distress damages, attorney’s fees, and costs. It also issued an injunction requiring the County to accommodate qualified medical marijuana users under its workplace policies, unless on-duty use or impairment is evident.

Implications for Employers

This ruling is among the first in Florida to affirm that employers cannot take adverse action against employees simply for testing positive for THC if they are registered medical marijuana users and are not impaired at work. It also suggests that traditional zero-tolerance policies may be legally vulnerable when applied to medical marijuana patients.

While many states have not yet legalized cannabis, this ruling demonstrates that there are significant shifts in opinion regarding the use of cannabis. Employers in states that have legalized either recreational or medicinal marijuana should consult with an attorney prior to taking employment action based upon any positive marijuana drug test that is not due to on-duty reasonable suspicion.