DRUG TESTING IN THE WORKPLACE

The problem of employee drug usage is growing in America. Public and private sector organizations have been struggling with ways to deal with the problem. The goal of these organizations is to operate with maximum efficiency and effectiveness and to be able to provide their employees with a safe environment to work in. Drug usage by employees compromises both of these objectives. This paper discusses the origins of drug testing in the workplace, the types of drug testing currently in use, court rulings that have specifically addressed employment drug testing, and arguments for the use of drug testing by employers. More specifically, the argument is made that drug testing is a strategic and effective management tool for public and private organizations, a tool which can increase productivity and provide other benefits.

. . .
as an applicant rather than an employee, the few courts cases where this issue has arisen have uniformly concluded that drug testing of law enforcement applicants through urinalysis is lawful (Higginbotham, 1987, p. 7). Employment termination has been the greatest motivating factor in lawsuits involving drug testing. The 1988 ruling in TWC v. Hughes Drilling Fluids (746 S.W.2d 796 writ denied) is probably the most useful case for employers in this area of the law because it not only resolved an issue of drug testing, but also set an important precedent in unemployment compensation law. The ex employee, the benefits claimant in this case, had worked for the employer for more than two years at the time the employer introduced a drug testing policy. The employee made it clear to his supervisor that he did not agree with the policy and would not comply with it. The supervisor let him know the policy applied to everyone. Nothing further happened until about two and a half months later, when the employer required the employee and others to undergo a random test. The claimant refused to take the test, even after being warned his job was in jeopardy for such refusal, and was fired. The claimant filed an unemployment claim and was
. . .

Some common words found in the essay are:
Moving Forward, Civil Service, Free Workplace, Drug Testing, Privacy Protection, Supreme Court, Justice Stewart, Beecham Laboratories, Essential Public, Rabb Skinner, drug testing, fourth amendment, employment drug, employment drug testing, drug free, private sector, public private, supreme court, public sector, public private sector, law enforcement, testing workplace, drug testing workplace, private sector organizations, bureau national affairs,
Approximate Word count = 5525
Approximate Pages = 22 (250 words per page)

More Essays on DRUG TESTING IN THE WORKPLACE