Mark A. de Bernardo is a Partner in the Washington, DC Region Office of Jackson Lewis, a preeminent labor and employment law firm with more than 650 employment lawyers in 46 offices. He is a nationally recognized expert on workplace drug-testing and substance-abuse-prevention issues, and concentrates his practice in these areas. He also represents employers on employment litigation and counseling, senior executive personnel actions, labor-management relations, legislative and regulatory issues, alternative dispute resolution, and management of employment-related class actions.
Mr. de Bernardo has testified more than 40 times before Congress and various federal and state regulatory agencies and legislative committees on employment and labor law issues. He has submitted 11 amici curiae briefs to the United States Supreme Court, and nearly 30 amici briefs overall to various courts on behalf of trade associations, business coalitions, and corporate clients. He has provided legal representation to more than 30 Fortune 200 corporations; five federal executive branch agencies; the states of Kansas, Louisiana, and California; the governments of Japan, Spain, and the Bahamas; and nearly 20 national trade associations.
He was the founder (in 1989), and is the Executive Director of the Institute for a Drug-Free Workplace, a national coalition dedicated to promoting and preserving the rights of employers and employees in effective substance-abuse-prevention programs, and is the founder (in 1995), and served as the President of the Foundation for Drug Education and Awareness.
Mr. de Bernardo is the author of four state drug-testing laws, and the only workplace drug-testing law endorsed by the President’s Commission on Model State Drug Laws. Among the many clients he has represented on drug-testing issues are the National Basketball Association, the U.S. House of Representatives, and more than 20 Fortune 200 corporations.
Mr. de Bernardo is the Practice Leader for the Jackson Lewis Practice Group on Drug Testing and Substance-Abuse Prevention, which includes nearly 15 lawyers in the Firm.
On the substance-abuse-prevention issue, Jackson Lewis drafts, reviews, and revises policies and attendant employer documents (including DOT-compliant policies); provides manager and supervisor training; designs and conducts employee education and awareness programs; represents employers in arbitration; litigates in defense of challenges to corporate policies and actions; negotiates collective bargaining agreement provisions; performs compliance audits; and advises employers on state and federal statutory and regulatory requirements.
He is the author or co-author of 18 books on employment and labor law topics, primarily on drug testing and substance-abuse prevention in the workplace, including the two-volume, 1220-page Guide to State and Federal Drug-Testing Laws, now in its 15th Edition.
He is a frequent speaker at conferences, and has appeared on the Today Show, Good Morning America, Crossfire, Larry King Live, and the ABC, CBS, and NBC evening news. Mr. de Bernardo has been quoted in such publications as Time, Newsweek, U.S. News and World Report, The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, and The Washington Post.
Mark is AV-rated by Martindale-Hubbell, and is listed among the best labor lawyers in Virginia by Chambers USA.
Mr. de Bernardo is active in a number of professional and community organizations. He has served as Special Counsel for Domestic Policy and Director of Labor Law for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. He was appointed, and twice reappointed, by the Japanese government as the American management representative to the Japan Institute of Labour. He is the founder (in 1998), and serves as Executive Director and President of the Council for Employment Law Equity. He also has contributed a chapter to several ABA publications, and has been a guest lecturer at the U.S. Army War College, NYU, Georgetown, Johns Hopkins, George Washington, American, and the University of Kansas.
Mark’s community activities include serving on the Board of Directors of the Oblates of Saint Francis de Sales. He has been a member of the Gonzaga College High School Fathers’ Club, and has served on The Hunger Project’s Global Investment Committee, and on the executive committee of the Lido Civic and Community Club.
Mr. de Bernardo is a member of the District of Columbia Bar and the U.S. Supreme Court Bar, and has been active in the American Bar Association.
.
Mr. de Bernardo was awarded a B.A. cum laude from Marquette University in 1976, and a J.D. from the Georgetown University Law Center in 1979.
He, his wife Jennifer, and their sons Joseph, Matthew, and Jonathan reside in Vienna, Virginia.
November 2 was a good day for those who support substance-abuse prevention, and a bad day for potheads and for those who support marijuana legalization.
Four-out-of-four marijuana initiatives were defeated — three by sizeable margins. In fact, legalization advocates seem to now be losing — consistently and by wider margins — in their “war for drugs.”
California
The big battle was in California, where Proposition 19, despite significant financial support from a couple of high-profile liberals and some leads in polls taken earlier this year, was defeated by nearly 10 percentage points (54.7% to 45.3%).
The vote was 2,797,169 to 2,317,450, the second time marijuana legalization was defeated at the ballot box in California (the first time was in 1972). With marijuana legalization being a two-time loser in California, California voters — like those in Alaska, Colorado, Nevada, and South Dakota — have now handed legalization advocates an 0-and-6 unblemished record of consistent defeat.
California Proposition 19 was likely the highest profile of the 161 ballot initiatives in 37 states on Election Day.
It was funded with $4.2 million in backing — including $1 million from billionaire activist George Soros and $1.5 million from medical marijuana entrepreneur Richard Lee. Lee has very profitably exploited the California “medical marijuana” market. He funds “Oaksterdam” (a combination of Oakland and Amsterdam) “University,” which now has four campuses, and runs a dispensary, a nursery, and a marketing operation for the “cannabis industry.”
Proposition 19 also was supported by the California chapter of the NAACP and several major California labor unions.
Proposition 19 was opposed by the last nine Drug Enforcement Administration administrators, the Obama administration, many major law enforcement agencies, several prominent religious groups — including prominent African-American clergy — Governor-elect Jerry Brown, gubernatorial candidate Meg Whitman, Senators Barbara Boxer and Diane Feinstein, Senate candidate Carly Fiorina, the California Chamber of Commerce and — as you know — the Institute for a Drug-Free Workplace.
The ballot initiative lost in 51 of California’s 58 counties. The only counties in which it had majority support were all in northern California — all in the San Francisco Bay area.
Had Proposition 19 passed, marijuana would have been legal for personal use, cultivation, and distribution, and could have been sold legally to persons 21 and older. The compromise on worker and public safety and health would have been enormous, as would the detrimental impact on employee performance and productivity. Employers would have been prohibited from discriminating against job applicants and employees based on their marijuana use.
South Dakota
A “medical-marijuana” initiative was defeated in South Dakota again — in fact, by a much wider margin than in 2006.
Initiated Measure 13 lost, 63 to 37 percent. Four years ago, it was supported by 48 percent of South Dakota voters. The drop in support was by more than 11 percent overall — from 48 percent to 36.69 percent.
Oregon
Oregon — which like California is one of 14 states to permit the use of marijuana, at least under some circumstances, for patients suffering from debilitating medical conditions (circumstances which in many cases are very limited by the state governments, but which in several broader “medical-marijuana” states such as California are subject to significant abuse by “recreational” users) — considered a ballot initiative, Measure 74, which would have set up state-regulated dispensaries.
However, Oregon voters “just said no,” rejecting Measure 74 by a 56.16-to-43.84 percent margin (757,690 to 591,384), with 95 percent of the vote counted.
Arizona
Finally, in the only close vote on a pro-marijuana initiative, Arizona voters again rejected a “medical-marijuana” proposal. Proposition 203 was defeated in a very close vote by a 50-to-49 percent margin (by slightly less than 7,000 votes).
All in all, Election Day was triumphant as a barometer of growing public intolerance of drug abuse and drug abusers, and their misguided — and often misrepresented — attempts at legalization.
Mark A. de Bernardo is the executive director for the Institute for a Drug-Free Workplace. He is also a partner in the Washington, D.C. region office of Jackson Lewis, a national management-side employment law firm with more than 650 lawyers who exclusively advise and defend employers.
Get Mark A. de Bernardo Feed
Loading ...
