Testing

Can we demand a drug test for an employee recently convicted of drug violations?

10/30/2009

Q. One of our employees was recently in jail for traffic and drug violations. Before he returns to work, what guidelines can we follow to ensure that he’s drug-free? Will we be discriminating if we require a drug test before allowing him back on site, even though we didn’t require such a test when he was hired?

Signed drug testing form good enough to satisfy DATWA

10/15/2009

The Drug and Alcohol Testing in the Workplace Act says, “Before requesting an employee to undergo drug or alcohol testing, an employer shall provide the employee with a form, developed by the employer, on which to acknowledge that the employee has seen the employer’s drug and alcohol testing policy.” Does that mean the employee has to sign the form immediately before the test is administered?

Vikings defensive tackles now on offense over drug tests

10/15/2009

The 8th Circuit Court of Appeals in late September upheld a lower court ruling that the National Football League cannot suspend Minnesota Vikings defensive tackles Kevin Williams and Pat Williams for violating the sport’s drug policy.

Detail concerns before ordering fitness exams

10/13/2009

Under EEOC guidelines, employers can demand a fitness-for-duty exam if they can prove they have a reasonable belief—based on objective evidence—that an employee’s medical condition will impair his or her ability to perform the essential functions of the job or pose a safety threat. If you believe either is the case, make sure you document your objective and reasonable beliefs before demanding the exam.

Firing for positive drug test? Prepare to defend test validity

10/05/2009

Generally, employees can appeal if they’re denied unemployment compensation because they were fired for cause. To win, they must show they were fired without just cause. However, the rules change when an employee is fired for a positive drug test.

Fired driver files suits over false-positive drug test

09/14/2009

A recent Illinois case illustrates how employers can get into expensive litigation if their drug-testing vendors don’t follow proper procedures when conducting random drug tests.

New DOT rule means taking a real close look at drug tests

09/08/2009

In 2008, the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) changed its regulations for drug testing to include direct observation of return-to-duty and follow-up drug tests. DOT regulations require random drug testing of urine for commercial motor-vehicle drivers, and pipeline, airline, transit and marine employees.

Are drug testing programs constitutional?

08/26/2009

Q. An employee says our drug testing program violates his constitutional rights. What can I tell him to prove that we’re well within the law?

DOT rule calls for direct observation of drug tests

08/20/2009

If you have transportation workers in safety-sensitive jobs, take note: New U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) rules kick in Aug. 31 that affect return-to-work drug tests given to employees who previously tested positive or underwent drug rehab.

Drug-tested employees may have second chance to sue

08/14/2009

Employers almost always contract out workplace drug testing and then rely on the results the contractor provides. If the employer then fires an employee who tests positive, chances are a court won’t second-guess the decision, since the employer relied on the test. That doesn’t mean the testing company can’t be sued.