What marijuana rescheduling could mean for hiring and discipline policies

Marijuana policies in the workplace have been evolving for years, but proposed federal rescheduling could make 2026 a turning point for employers. For HR, payroll, and compliance teams, the key question is how those changes intersect with hiring decisions, workplace discipline, and safety expectations.

Federal vs. state law
At the center of employer uncertainty is the tension between federal and state law. Even today, marijuana remains federally illegal, despite widespread state-level legalization or protection. That disconnect has created a gray area where employers must balance federal rules, state protections, and practical workplace realities.

If marijuana is rescheduled from Schedule I to Schedule III, it would not legalize recreational use at the federal level. Instead, it would allow expanded research and medical use, while leaving state and local marijuana laws intact. In other words, employers shouldn’t expect a clean legal reset. State protections around testing, accommodation, or off-duty use would still apply, and federal oversight would remain relevant.

One important shift, however, is how federal law might treat marijuana going forward. Today, because marijuana is federally illegal, employers are not required under laws like the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) to accommodate medical marijuana use. Rescheduling could open the door to future accommodation obligations, particularly as marijuana becomes more accepted for medical treatment. That possibility alone makes this an area employers should be watching closely.

Testing protocols haven’t caught up
Drug testing practices have not kept pace with evolving cannabis laws, and that gap is already creating confusion in the workplace. Employers increasingly encounter employees who test positive and respond with, “I didn’t use marijuana, I used Delta-8,” or another hemp-derived product that is legal under state law.

The challenge is that many cannabis- and hemp-derived products are processed by the body in the same way for drug testing purposes. Even products marketed as legal often contain small amounts of THC, and those byproducts can still show up on a drug test. From an employer’s perspective, a positive test result is still a positive result, regardless of where the THC came from.

In most states, especially when testing follows observable signs of impairment, employers may still take disciplinary action, even if the employee believed their off-duty use was lawful. This reality underscores that impairment at work is never acceptable. Just as alcohol may be legal but intoxication on the job is not, any impairment caused by marijuana or its derivatives can still justify discipline. 

To reduce risk and confusion, employers should ensure policies clearly define impairment, explain testing protocols, and distinguish between legal off-duty use and on-the-job expectations. Clarity here protects both the organization and the workforce as cannabis laws continue to evolve.

Anticipating increased use and operational impacts
If marijuana is rescheduled, federal agencies forecast increased usage, expanded research and development, and broader commercial activity tied to cannabis and CBD products. This could also affect Medicare and Medicaid coverage for certain treatments, further normalizing marijuana’s presence in medical contexts.

For employers, increased use means increased exposure to policy questions, accommodation requests, and employee misunderstandings. Clear communication will be essential – for both what is allowed and what is not.

Criminal records and hiring decisions
Rescheduling may also influence how marijuana-related criminal records are viewed in hiring decisions. While it’s unlikely that past convictions will be broadly expunged, as those offenses were crimes at the time they occurred, future possession-related offenses may carry less weight, particularly at the federal level.

Employers should evaluate criminal history based on whether it directly relates to the job and workplace safety. A marijuana possession offense that has no connection to the role itself may become harder to justify as a disqualifier, especially as public policy shifts. States may introduce new guidance on how pre- and post-rescheduling offenses should be treated, adding another layer employers will need to track.

What employers should be doing now
Even as rescheduling remains prospective, employers don’t need to wait to act. Now is the time to:

• Review drug testing and reasonable suspicion policies for clarity and consistency.
• Reinforce expectations around impairment and workplace safety.
• Ensure hiring practices properly tie criminal history evaluations to job requirements.
• Educate managers and employees on the difference between legal use and acceptable workplace behavior.

While marijuana policy continues to evolve, employers are still responsible for maintaining safe, compliant, and productive workplaces. Staying ahead of these changes will be key in 2026.