Drug and alcohol testing in work

greengirl31

I work for a large company which has a fairly even mixture of office based staff and staff who operate heavy machinery. Recently HR have decided they want tointroduce a random alcohol and drug testing policy. Most of the staff are covered by existing agreements but new staff like myself have individual contracts and part of this contract is that we are subject to random testing. Also, any promotions are “appear” dependent on agreeing to this random testing. When I signed my contract, I did voice objections to the testing as I felt that you cannot randomly test XX amount o femployees.



Anyway, my question is can I refuse to be tested even thoughit’s in my contract based on the fact that the policy doesn’t cover allemployees and therefore can’t be truly random ??



Thanks

Paulw

greengirl31 wrote: »

Anyway, my question is can I refuse to be tested even thoughit’s in my contract based on the fact that the policy doesn’t cover allemployees and therefore can’t be truly random ??

If it's in your contract and you signed the contract then you have no right to refuse the test.

Also, the "random" part would not be random in relation to staff, but more likely random in relation to date/time. So, they can test you any random day of the week at any random time.

That would be my view.

thomas anderson.

Drugs are bad m'kay

Santa Cruz

It's in your contract which I presumed you read and signed. It is becoming a fact of life in every occupation now. The employer has to protect himself. Who want's to be working with some junkie who is unstable due to his addiction or is a liability to the firm

mikom

Santa Cruz wrote: »

It's in your contract which I presumed you read and signed. It is becoming a fact of life in every occupation now. The employer has to protect himself. Who want's to be working with some junkie who is unstable due to his addiction or is a liability to the firm

I agree.
Just think, the battle of Britain would have been lost if Churchill had been an alcoholic........

Santa Cruz

mikom wrote: »

I agree.
Just think, the battle of Britain would have been lost if Churchill had been an alcoholic........

And why did Adolf take those dam sleeping pills the night before D Day?

Manach

A contract's terms are of course very important, and should be complied with in good faith by both parties. On the other hand, there would be unlying fairness onus to ensure that the tests do not impact any group more than other - ie young workers over older ones, or males more than females. So this would be up to HR to show by keeping strict records that any such inproportionate actions are not occurring.

greengirl31

I suppose my issue is that testing cannot be truly random if it does not apply to all employees or employees in a particular section ....

I'm not concerned about the alcohol thing - my days of coming into work hung over are long gone but I have concerns over other medication that I may be taking that I don't think my employers should be privy to unless I decide to tell them.

Paulw

greengirl31 wrote: »

I suppose my issue is that testing cannot be truly random if it does not apply to all employees or employees in a particular section ....

I'm not concerned about the alcohol thing - my days of coming into work hung over are long gone but I have concerns over other medication that I may be taking that I don't think my employers should be privy to unless I decide to tell them.

It will depend on the wording of the contract.

Is it to test random employees at a scheduled date/time, or is it to test any employee at a random date/time?

This will be specified in your contract. If your contracts specifies that you can be randomly tested, then this only applies to you. It means that YOU can be tested at any random date/time. It does not mean that random employees need to be tested.

If your medication may impact on you or your ability to do your job, then you should inform your employer anyway, for health and safety of yourself and your other employees.

You should read your contract carefully. If you have concerns, then go consult a solicitor, before signing. Of course, if you have already signed, then you have already agreed to be tested. No harm consulting a solicitor anyway.

Peregrinus

greengirl31 wrote: »

I suppose my issue is that testing cannot be truly random if it does not apply to all employees or employees in a articular section ....

In the context, "random clearly means "random among the employees who have agreed to be subject to testing".

schemingbohemia

greengirl31 wrote: »

I suppose my issue is that testing cannot be truly random if it does not apply to all employees or employees in a particular section ....

I'm not concerned about the alcohol thing - my days of coming into work hung over are long gone but I have concerns over other medication that I may be taking that I don't think my employers should be privy to unless I decide to tell them.

I would have thought that the drug testing is for illegal drugs and won't list prescription drugs, what does their testing policy state?

greengirl31

The testing, which will be done by an external company, will show up all substances. Anything that shows up in the tests will be supplied to my employer.
Their theory is, we work in a hazardous environment and everyone needs to be tip top which I fully appreciate. But my argument is, being office based, I don't work in a hazardous environment and if I take a panadol for a headache, it's going to show up in my test ... I also have concerns about prescribed medication which I believe is between me and my GP and none of my employers business .

I'll have to check my contract about the Random testing ... I presumed it was random as in what employees were tested but they may have worded it so that the timing is random rather than those tested.

Five Lamps

Does it apply to office staff?

Given the way that a large percentage of the Irish work force turns up half cut on any given day, it really should. Lost productivity etc.

greengirl31

Yes it does apply to office staff but I should mention that the average of the work force is 43 so lost productivity from hangovers is not the issue.

I have no issue with the principle of drug testing but I do have issues with the way it's been approached by my employers ..... The fact is, at the moment, there is no policy in place and this is where the issues are arising. The employer wants to bring this in across the organisation but it is being resisted by employees mainly because of the nature of information that will be passed to the employer. For example, if I was on HRT, that medication would show up in my test and I may not want my employer to know that. Male employees may be taking Viagra a few times a week and they may not want that to be known by HR either. If they were to issue a list of banned substances and only test for those it may sort that issue. However, the fact that only a relatively small number of employees are subject to the tests is another bowl of contention that I can't see being resolved any time soon.

sopretty

I might be incorrect here, but I don't think a drug test would pick up every drug known to mankind, unless the test is specifically designed to test for every drug (quite expensive!!!). Like, a blood test for alcohol, shows the alcohol content only. It doesn't start beeping and throwing out a list of legal/illegal substances. Perhaps someone with medical knowledge or laboratory testing might be able to fill confirm or deny this notion? Is there a medical forum you could post this question on?

sopretty

Actually, the more I think about it, it would be impossible for them to do one blood test, which just lists out every medication you're on. If that was the case, you wouldn't hear about more blood tests being ordered, to check for x, y or z etc. These tests are pretty specific as far as I know. They would be specific and limited. You could ask for a list of what substances they are checking for though!

sopretty

Oh, and if they are testing for any prescribed medications, such as maybe anti-depressants or sleeping tablets or something, you could argue that this is an invasion of privacy? I'm sure if your doctor deems you fit to carry out the work you're doing, while you're on a certain medication, then they would have no right to say 'oh, you've traces of sleeping tablets in your blood every morning'.
The more legally minded here might guide you on that one.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

Marcusm

mikom wrote: »

I agree.
Just think, the battle of Britain would have been lost if Churchill had been an alcoholic........

Didn't help those in Gallipoli!