In the 1960s,
heroin addiction was seen as the greatest threat
(after alcoholism) to the health and safety of
American workers. By the early 1970s other drugs
of abuse also began to be considered threats to
industry.
These included all opiates, amphetamines and
other stimulants, illicit psychoactive drugs such
as LSD and marijuana, and, to a small but growing
extent, prescription drugs such as tranquilizers
and sedatives. It is found from the US Department
of Labor that over 8 million Americans are involved
in using any kind of illegal drugs. Among them,
73 % are employed.
The Institute for a Drug-Free Workplace had conducted
a Gallup Survey of employees. 37 % of the respondents
agreed that drug use at workplace has increased
in the last 5 years. Most of the respondents were
found to agree with the drug testing. It is found
that an average cost of drug testing per employee
is $11,000-$13,000 annually. (Sandy, 2004)
The Mandatory Guidelines
for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs:
Final Guidelines (U.S. Department
of Health and Human Services 1988), published
in response to the president's order, applies
to all federal agencies and serves as a model
for private industry. It requires all federal
testing programs to test urine for marijuana and
cocaine and, optionally, for opiates, amphetamines,
and phencyclidine.
There are three basic types of workplace drug-testing
programs.
Pre-employment screening of job applicants
These programs are the most widely used.
Some of them also require drug testing of current
employees who wish to transfer to more sensitive
positions. Testing is usually done with the applicant's
or employee's full prior knowledge.
Random testing - Such programs
involve the selection of a sample from a pool
of all employees, or of those in sensitive positions,
and may be either announced or unannounced.
Testing for cause - This approach
is based on reasonable suspicion about a given
employee's current drug use, either because he
has exhibited aberrant behavior or because he
has been involved in an accident on the job.
Types of Drug Testing
Methods
Biochemical Tests: Urinalysis,
Blood and saliva analysis and Hair analysis.
Observational Methods: Physiological
Indicators (e.g., nystagmus, pupil dilation),
Performance tests and Drug recognition experts.
Self-Report Measures: Overt/Direct
measures and Covert/Indirect measures.
Background Investigations
Polygraph testing (Winfred
& Dennis, 1997)
Legal and Ethical Issues
All drug-testing programs have raised a number
of legal questions. The American Medical Association's
Council on Scientific Affairs (1987) and Montagne
and associates (1988b) discuss legal theories
applied to specific challenges of drug-testing
programs that affect both public and private employees.
Imwinkelried (1987) and Angarola (1991) have reviewed
the legal decisions relevant to drug testing in
private industry.
The most frequent argument against drug testing
refers to protection of the individual by the
Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The Fourth
Amendment guarantees the right of citizens to
be "secure in their persons, houses, papers,
and effects against unreasonable searches and
seizures." The Fifth Amendment protects citizens
against self-incrimination. While most experts
agree that forcing a worker to submit to a urine
test does constitute a search under the Fourth
Amendment, the principal controversy is, whether
drug testing represents an unreasonable search.
The courts must balance the degree to which the
search is an intrusion upon the individual's Fourth
Amendment right, and the degree to which the search
reflects a legitimate government interest.
It has also been argued that drug testing is
a violation of an individual's right to privacy.
Although there is no specific constitutional provision
guaranteeing such a right, it may be inferred
from several provisions, taken together with the
Fourth and Fifth Amendments. The right to privacy
generally refers to an individual's self-interest
in avoiding disclosure of personal information,
and in protecting his independence in making certain
kinds of personal decisions.
Drug-testing procedures, by requiring employees
to reveal specific information about their persons,
may be termed an invasion of privacy. The right
to privacy has also been invoked against the urine
collection procedure, if this requires direct
observation of urination to insure that an individual
does not substitute or tamper with the specimen.
Argument over the role of drug testing in American
society can be expected to rage through the contentious
century's final decade. Scarcely a week goes by
without a new court decision, a new piece of legislation,
a new disagreement in collective bargaining, a
new research finding, a new technological advance,
or a new scandal relating to the misuse of alcohol
and other drugs and the inevitable consequent
call for testing to determine or deter such misuse.
If the trends of the past decade continue, one
can expect to see greater and greater employment
of drug testing under both government and private
auspices.
Bibliography
AMA Council on Scientific Affairs 1987 Issues
in employee drug testing. Journal of the American
Medical Association 257(22):3110-4.
Angarola, R. T. 1991 Substance abuse testing in
the workplace: Legal issues and corporate responses.
In Drug testing: Issues and options, ed. R. H.
Coombs and L. J. West. New York: Oxford Univ.
Press.
Arthur Jr., Winfred, Doverspike, Dennis. EMPLOYMENT-RELATED
DRUG TESTING: IDIOSYNCRATIC CHARACTERISTICS AND
ISSUES. Public Personnel Management, 00910260,
Spring97, Vol. 26, Issue 1, p77, 11p.
Imwinkelried, E. J. 1987 Some preliminary thoughts
on the wisdom of governmental prohibition or regulation
of private employee urinalysis testing. Clinical
Chemistry 33 (suppl. 11): 19B 32B.
Montagne, M., C. B. Pugh, and J. L. Fink III
1988b Testing for drug use, Part 2: Legal, social,
and ethical concerns. American Journal of Hospital
Pharmacy 45(6):1509 22.
Smith, Sandy. What Every Employer Should Know
about Drug Testing in the Workplace. Occupational
Hazards, 00297909, Aug2004, Vol. 66, Issue 8,
p45, 3p.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
1988 Mandatory guidelines for federal workplace
drug testing programs: Final guidelines. Washington,
D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.
|