Drug Testing in the Workplace
This is an excerpt from the paper...
Due to absenteeism, accidents, medical-liability and healthcare expenditures, substance-abusing employees cost employers more than $100 billion annually. Obviously substance-abusing employees represent a major problem for society. According to one survey conducted by the National Household Survey on Drug Abuse (NHSDA) found that 70% of illegal drug users are employed full-time. Such figures help define workplace substance abuse as a major social problem. Employee substance abuse is responsible for billions of dollars in preventable costs to employers, the health care industry, and society. For this reason, it is critical that substance abuse prevention programs for the workplace are tested and developed.One of the surest ways to develop effective substance abuse prevention programs for the workplace is a review of the research pertaining to a variety of challenges faced by such a goal. There are a number of challenges in testing and developing such programs. These include hitting the target audience with prevention information, handling employer concerns, gathering substance use data from organizations, accessing and using records, and employee concerns. In 1988 as part of the omnibus anti-drug legislation, Congress enacted the Drug-Free Workplace Act. The Act mandates certain federal contractors and grantees establish a drug-free workplace. Some of the requirements of the Act include: establishin
. . .
he had a past addiction which had been rehabilitated.
After his termination, Mr. Hernandez sued the company citing American with Disabilities Act (ADA) protection. Because of ADA protection, the Ninth Circuit Court ruled the companyÆs policy unlawful, ôThe Court acknowledged that when Hernandez was terminated back in 1991, he wasnÆt a person with a disability, because the language of the ADA specifically excludes current drug users from ADA coverage. But he had a record of a disability at the company, so when he reapplied after rehabilitation, no longer using drugs, he was entitled to the ActÆs protection.ö Hughes appealed the case to the Supreme Court, which recently agreed to hear it. Such decisions are important for employers with respect to drug testing and comprehensive substance abuse programs that include rehabilitation efforts.
When companies adopt a drug testing program, they must follow a particular protocol known as the ôchain of custody.ö Failure to do so not only makes them in violation of federal mandates but it also fails to afford maximum diligence on behalf of the employee. The chain of custody is the path from the point of sample collection to the final tests. Every stage of the process is documented
. . .
Some common words found in the essay are:
According Zarcone, Maltby Zimmer, Act Act, Supreme Court, EVIDENCE Legal, Union ACLU, Programs EAPs, Officers AAMRO, RESEARCH PURPOSE, Abuse NHSDA, drug testing, substance abuse, drug-free workplace, testing workplace, drug testing workplace, workplace substance abuse, workplace substance, ôdrug testing, drug workplace, random drug, using drugs, substance abuse prevention, random drug testing, abuse prevention, mandatory random drug,
Approximate Word count = 2074
Approximate Pages = 8 (250 words per page)
More Essays on Drug Testing in the Workplace
|