- Home
- Contact
- About Us
- Forgot Password
- Memberships
- Register
- Submit Press
- Privacy Policy
- TOS
- Disclaimers
- Marketing & Branding
- Corporate Sales
- Education
- RSS
© 2026 WorkCompCentral Workers Compensation Information
Purchase this story for only $7.99!
Add to CartFor access to all our articles, check out our subscription options.
Nov 6, 2026
Join Albert & Mackenzie on Friday, November 6, 2026, and help continue the work that began on the …
Nov 7, 2026
Join us for a half-day webinar focused on Case Law Updates as well as new statutes and regulations …
Dec 3, 2026
All aboard for a magical holiday evening at AWCP’s Polar Express Holiday Party at the California S …
3 Comments
Log in to post a comment
John A. Don esq. Nov 3, 2016 a 7:58 am PDT
God forbid we use a safe natural substance to take away pain and stress. Once big pharma gets into the THC market - things will change.
Alexander Zaks Nov 3, 2016 a 7:58 am PDT
Just because H&S Code section 11362.758 says that "nothing shall require" does not mean that the section must be read to prohibit a court from ordering a carrier to pay for medical marijuana.
The issues the Board seems focused on, as usual, are just dumb. Look, the Board issues extra-legal decisions all the time, if they just don't want carriers to have to pay for pot, just write that and be done. Otherwise do what you're supposed to do and do what the rules require you to do.
Apr 17, 2015 a 5:04 am PDT
This comment is private
Apr 17, 2015 a 9:04 am PDT
This comment is private