Minnesota Session Laws - 1992, Regular Session

  

                         Laws of Minnesota 1992 

                        CHAPTER 538-S.F.No. 2336 
           An act relating to employment; prohibiting certain 
          actions by an employer because of a job applicants' or 
          employees' use of certain products; proposing coding 
          for new law in Minnesota Statutes, chapter 181. 
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA: 
    Section 1.  [181.938] [NONWORK ACTIVITIES; PROHIBITED 
EMPLOYER CONDUCT.] 
    Subdivision 1.  [DEFINITION.] For the purpose of this 
section, "employer" has the meaning given it in section 179.01, 
subdivision 3. 
    Subd. 2.  [PROHIBITED PRACTICE.] An employer may not refuse 
to hire a job applicant or discipline or discharge an employee 
because the applicant or employee engages in or has engaged in 
the use or enjoyment of lawful consumable products, if the use 
or enjoyment takes place off the premises of the employer during 
nonworking hours.  For purposes of this section, "lawful 
consumable products" means products whose use or enjoyment is 
lawful and which are consumed during use or enjoyment, and 
includes food, alcoholic or nonalcoholic beverages, and tobacco. 
    Subd. 3.  [EXCEPTIONS.] (a) It is not a violation of 
subdivision 2, for an employer to restrict the use of lawful 
consumable products by employees during nonworking hours if the 
employer's restriction: 
    (1) relates to a bona fide occupational requirement and is 
reasonably related to employment activities or responsibilities 
of a particular employee or group of employees; or 
    (2) is necessary to avoid a conflict of interest or the 
appearance of a conflict of interest with any responsibilities 
owed by the employee to the employer. 
    (b) It is not a violation of subdivision 2, for an employer 
to refuse to hire an applicant or discipline or discharge an 
employee who refuses or fails to comply with the conditions 
established by a chemical dependency treatment or aftercare 
program. 
    (c) It is not a violation of subdivision 2, for an employer 
to offer, impose, or have in effect a health or life insurance 
plan that makes distinctions between employees for the type of 
coverage or the cost of coverage based upon the employee's use 
of lawful consumable products, provided that, to the extent that 
different premium rates are charged to the employees, those 
rates must reflect the actual differential cost to the employer. 
    (d) It is not a violation of subdivision 2, for an employer 
to refuse to hire an applicant or discipline or discharge an 
employee on the basis of the applicant's or employee's past or 
present job performance. 
    Subd. 4.  [REMEDY.] The sole remedy for a violation of 
subdivision 2 is a civil action for damages.  Damages are 
limited to wages and benefits lost by the individual because of 
the violation.  A court shall award the prevailing party in the 
action, whether plaintiff or defendant, court costs and a 
reasonable attorney fee. 
    Presented to the governor April 17, 1992 
    Signed by the governor April 29, 1992, 8:02 a.m.