Hopefully this is the penultimate time I’ll write about Ballot Measure 119. Hopefully, some three weeks from now, I’ll publish one last post explaining that this landgrab initiative was annihilated, judicially speaking. The recent Federal Court hearing On April 29th, Judge Michael H. Simon heard arguments from the UFCW 555 and the Oregon Department of
I’ve spilled a fair bit of ink on Ballot Measure 119 going back to last summer. Because no good deed goes unpunished, I continue to receive a stream of inquiries regarding associated compliance, e.g., “Where do I get a labor peace agreement?” “What’s this prompt on my CAMP screen?” “What if I don’t comply?” All
Last Wednesday, the Oregon cannabis lawsuit we’ve been waiting for finally dropped. Industry operators should tip their hats to plaintiffs Ascend Dispensary and Bubble’s Hash, and our friends at the law firm Fisher Phillips LLP, for stepping up and challenging Ballot Measure 119 in U.S. District Court. BM 119 passed in November 2024 with 57%
Last week, I wrote a round-up post on Oregon cannabis. This week, I thought I’d drop a line on the federal happenings. Which are quite a few. The Nixon tapes This was a fun piece of news, unearthed by Minnesota cannabis lobbyist Kurtis Hanna. Ernesto Londoño then broke the story on September 14th for the
We all know the Oregon cannabis industry is struggling. We write often about the causes on a macro level, possible solutions, and what we see as business litigators. We haven’t written much about one of the basic areas of employment law that applies to Oregon marijuana businesses: workers rights to wages and employer responsibilities. As
Conditional Adult Use Retail Dispensary (“CAURD”) license applicants and those applicants seeking unconditional licenses in New York must comply with the New York State mandate and enter into, maintain and comply with a Labor Peace Agreement (“LPA”) with a bona-fide labor union. However, an LPA is not required to apply for a CAURD license, but
California deems nearly all kinds of workers employees. There are, however, some important circumstances where workers may be classified as contractors. In my first post of this series, “Classifying California Cannabis Workers,” I explained the basics of employee versus independent contractor classification. Today, I look at some of the key independent contractor exceptions for California
California is one of the trickiest states in the U.S. for employers, and especially for cannabis employers. The numerous, byzantine requirements here simply don’t exist in many other states. Classifying California cannabis workers is one of the biggest challenges for local industry. Cannabis companies often think they can get around employment law requirements by calling
Previously we wrote about equity compensation for cannabis employees from the perspective of companies. We have been dealing with more and more companies adding equity to their overall compensation scheme, so now is a good time to revisit it from the employee perspective. For an overview of the types of equity compensation available, see here.
Over the years in my practice, including several instances in the past six months, I have advised cannabis business owners when a former partner has come back to haunt the business operations, usually looking for some type of payout based on a prior conversation or an agreement originally inked upon a lost napkin or envelope.
