Cannabis Workers, Businesses & IAM Support Bill to Protect Industry and Promote Fairness & Consistency
PHOTO: Cannabis Union Association members with Rep. David Boyer (R-Poland) & Adam Goode of the Maine AFL-CIO
Cannabis businesses with the Maine Cannabis Union and unionized cannabis workers with the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAMAW) testified before the Maine Legislature’s Veterans and Legal Affairs Committee on Wednesday to support a bill that would protect the marijuana industry from costly, redundant, arbitrary and unnecessary regulations. The group included employees of the Upta Camp Edible Company and Golden Road Extracts who organized their union with IAMAW in December.
Formed in December, the IAMAW cannabis workers union is the first cannabis workers union in Maine. The Machinists also provide technical support, lobbying services and staffing for the Maine Cannabis Union Association, a nonprofit organization of medical marijuana caregivers and small adult use companies, including storeowners, growers, extractors, wholesalers and caregivers.
LD 2147, sponsored by Rep. David Boyer (R-Poland), would remove a requirement that each individual serving of cannabis-infused products, typically gummy candy, be stamped with a universal symbol indicating that it contains THC, the psychoactive chemical found in cannabis. The law already requires each child-proof package of these products to be stamped with THC symbol.
“We are providing support for this bill as it addresses the inconsistent application of compliance standards in the Maine’s cannabis program,”said Adam Goode, Legislative & Political Director of the Maine AFL-CIO. Members of the Maine Cannabis Union struggle with the Office of Cannabis Policy’s approach that grants the inspectors discretion of the application of the rule embossing labels for gummies from Maine cannabis manufacturers. We support the policy that requires these products be sold in resealable, child-resistant packaging that is marked with the symbol indicating that it contains THC. Requirements for a universal symbol that each item in the package has a symbol of its own is redundant, ineffective and unnecessary.”
The Maine Cannabis Union asked Representative Boyer to submit the proposal after an inspector with the Maine Office of Cannabis Policy ordered that a company halt the sale of medical cannabis-infused gummies because it used an outdated stamp of a symbol on the product indicating that it contained THC. The move is resulting in the loss of thousands of dollars for the company and having a harmful impact on the business. Edible medical cannabis products are already required to have the THC symbol displayed prominently on on child-proof, resealable packaging.
Although the requirement to use the symbol on individual servings is not in statute for the medical program, the law gives inspectors discretion in how they enforce the law for medical cannabis products, which leads to arbitrary and subjective enforcement. OCP does not have the same requirement for individual servings of THC-infused products like popcorn, pretzels, granola and other snacks. OCP is also discouraging the use of granular power, such as citric acid of sugar, on THC-infused gummies because it obscures the symbol on the serving.
Testifying in support of the bill, the Maine Cannabis Union argued that the inspector’s insistence on the requirement is “having a direct and serious financial impact on many small cannabis businesses as it has forced manufacturers to order new candy molds and prohibited them from selling the products they have. It further argues that as long as the packaging is resealable and marked with the THC symbol then the universal symbol is redundant, ineffective and unnecessary.
“This per-serving universal symbol marking is an unnecessary business expense that does nothing to protect the public, especially non-readers such as young children and pets,” Susan Meehan of Waterville, President of the Maine Cannabis Union. “Stamping a product will do nothing to protect the most vulnerable from accidental ingestion. Rule and law cannot replace responsible consumers and responsible parenting and pet-ownership. As long as packaging is marked with the symbol andthe packaging is resealable ‘child-resistant,' then the universal symbol is redundant, ineffective and unnecessary. Why are we threatening production of ‘gummies’ or ‘fruit chews’ for example by not allowing sugar coating? This contingency on sugar coating is not clear and is subjectively dependent upon which inspector visits a facility.”