Last Chance Agreement Substance Abuse
There is also federal jurisprudence that supports the applicability of last-chance agreements. While such jurisprudence is not directly binding with respect to the California laboratory code, it provides an indication of the general attitude towards LCAs and convinces California courts, particularly in the absence of other California authority. For example, at Fuller v. Frank, 916 F.2d 558 (9. Cir. 1990), the Ninth Circuit confirmed a dismissal under the terms of an ACF and found that an appropriate adaptation of alcoholism must be „limited to its extent“ because „continued housing“ would simply allow an alcoholic to continue his or her alcohol consumption. Id. to 561. Fuller was referring to the Federal Sanitation Act of 1973; But the Gosvener court had no trouble applying Fuller to California law. He said, „We can follow the cases of the rehabilitation law if there is no California authority.“ Gosvener, 51 Cal. About four.
812 n.1. Although California`s case law on LCAs is not plentiful, the courts have secured last-chance agreements. For example, a complainant sued in Le Gosvener v. Coastal Corp. 51 Cal. About 4th 805 (Cal. Ct. App. 1996), his employer, accusing his employer of failing to properly house his alcoholism and illegally dismissing him.
The complainant had signed an ACF with his employer and then injured her. Id. at 809. The California Court of Appeals found that the employer had „properly exercised its contractual termination rights [Gosveners] “ because Gosvener had „violated the explicit terms“ of the ACA it signed. Id. at 814. (Note that the Colmenares decision tipped Gosvener as it suggested that „essential limitation“ instead of „limit“ was the right test to identify a disability. However, the other farms in Gosvener are not affected by Les Colmenares.) Finally, in California, there is another reason to take a break before an employee is fired for substance abuse issues. California Labor Code Section 1025 requires private employers employing 25 or more people to „reasonably house“ any employee who wishes to voluntarily commit to and participate in an alcohol or drug adjustment program.
(Employers are not prohibited from acting against a worker who, due to the worker`s current use of alcohol or drugs, is unable to assume his or her responsibilities or may not exercise his or her obligations in a manner that does not endanger his or her health or safety, or the health or safety of others.) Assuming that the employee meets all the conditions of the last-chance agreement and returns to work for a specified period of time and fully complies with the company`s guidelines for a specified period of time, he or she should at some point be exempt from the terms of the agreement and treated like other employees.
