Drug Testing News & Updates

Got a news tip or want to share a story related to drugs, drug testing, the drug testing industry, laws, regulations, or drug and alcohol-related news?  If so, send our editorial staff an email (info@drugtestingcourses.com), and we will respond within a day.

FMCSA Extends COVID-19 Measures for Three Months

Emergency Declaration No. 2020-002 Extended for Three Months President Trump declared a national emergency under 42 U.S.C. § 5191(b) related to Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19).[1] The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) issued Emergency Declaration 2020-002 in response to COVID-19 outbreaks and their effects on people and the immediate risk they present to public health, safety, and welfare

Cutting Through Reasonable Suspicion Overreaches Like Yeutter: Delineating Employee Privacy and Employer Safety Interests in Drug Testing

What protections are afforded to employees subject to federally mandated drug testing programs? In 1986 an Executive Order barred drug use by federal employees who were on or off-duty and tasked executive agencies with developing a drug-free workplace plan.[1] In August 1988, the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) responded to this order by implementing

Complying with OSHA Regulations in Drug Testing: Clarifying the Risk of Post-Accident Testing Programs

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (“OSHA”) was created to ensure safe and healthy working conditions for working women and men by establishing and enforcing standards and by providing training, outreach, education, and assistance.[1] In 2016, OSHA enhanced its enforcement efforts against employers who OSHA believed were using drug testing programs and safety incentives to improperly

Testing the Waters of Constitutional Privacy: When an Employer Requires a Drug Test on the Day of an Employment Offer

Is it unconstitutional for an employer to require that a drug test be taken on the same day that a prospective employee is offered the position? In the New Jersey case Vargo v. National Exchange. Carriers Association, Inc., John Vargo (the plaintiff) worked in a temporary position for a company called the National Exchange Carriers

Carving out Privacy Protections in Reasonable Suspicion Drug Testing in Casados

The case Casados v. Denver involves an action challenging the constitutionality of a drug and alcohol testing policy based on reasonable suspicion.[1] In October of 1988, the mayor issued Executive Order 94 (“the Order”) which established a drug and alcohol testing policy for employees of the City and County of Denver.[2] The Order allowed supervisors

Learning from Failure: What Edgerton can Teach Employers and their Service Agents About Inadequate Drug Testing Training

Edgerton v. State Personnel Board involved a dispute between the Department of Transportation (“Caltrans”) and the International Union of Operating Engineers (“IUOE”) and Perrin Edgerton.[1] Perri Edgerton was an equipment operator for Caltrans.[2] In October 1995, Edgerton failed a random drug test by testing positive for marijuana for which he was later fired.[3] After his

What Is The Policy For Hand Washing During Drug Testing?

It’s not enough to decide to have a drug-free workplace; guidelines and testing have to be implemented to reinforce this mandate. For some companies, this is done strictly to provide peace of mind and ensure a safer working environment for employees and management. For professional transportation companies, however, this is a legal requirement to stay

In-House Workplace Drug Testing Training Program Helps Employers Reduce Hiring Costs and Risk Post-COVID-19

The world has seen a substantial increase in unemployment due to COVID-19 and the subsequent statewide shutdowns. As states start pulling back on their shutdown policies,  companies are starting to reopen. Employers who had previously laid employees off are now ready to hire again–part of that onboarding process includes pre-employment drug screening for many. The

Saved by the Settlement: How a Union Settlement Trumped an Unconstitutional Return-to-Work Drug Testing Program

Bolden v. Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority involved a dispute between Bolden, a custodian employed by the Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (“SEPTA”) and represented by the Transport Workers Union of Philadelphia, Local 234 (“Local”).[1] Bolden was a maintenance custodian at SEPTA’s Fern Rock Depot from 1981 to 1986.[2] In August of 1986, Bolden was involved in

Holding Back Claims of Insufficient Reasonable Suspicion Under Collective Bargaining

Dykes v. Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority involved Dykes, a bus driver employed by the Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (“SEPTA”) and represented by the Transport Workers Union of Philadelphia, Local 234 (“Local”).[1] On July 13, 1993, Dykes drove a SEPTA bus along his regular route.[2] At some point during the trip, SEPTA supervisors boarded the bus,

Stueart v. Arkansas State Police Commission: Revealing the True Cost of Inadequate Drug Testing Training

Employers should always follow their drug-free workplace procedures; however, sometimes steps slip through the cracks causing critical issues down the line. Missing a step in a drug testing procedure can create devastating results because the mistake can put at risk an employee’s livelihood. In Stueart v. Arkansas State Police Commission, a police officer was discharged

AFGE v. Martin: Setting the Bounds of Reasonable Suspicion Testing for Suspected Off-Duty Conduct

In September of 1986, Executive Order 12564 was issued, which prohibited illegal drug use by federal employees both on and off duty.[1] The order directed all executive agencies to develop a plan for achieving a drug-free workplace.[2] In response to Executive Order 12564, the United States Department of Labor (“DOL”)  developed a Drug-Free Workplace Plan

The Clash of the Titans: Reasonable Suspicion Drug Test Disputes Face Off Against an Employer’s Good Faith in Kelly v. Boeing

The following case from Oregon focuses on reasonable suspicion testing and when an employer has a good faith belief when taking adverse action against an employee. The court in Kelly v. Boeing Company grappled with whether an employer had good faith belief to terminate or if discrimination was a factor present in the decision. In

Knox County: Evaluating the Constitutionality of Suspicionless and Reasonable Suspicion Testing Programs

Is testing an employee under reasonable suspicion a violation of his or her 4th amendment right to privacy? What are some examples or reasonable suspicion factors courts have considered constitutional? The United States Court of Appeals in the Sixth Circuit answered these employment concerns in Knox County Education Association v. Knox County Board of Education.

A TRUSTED EDUCATION PROVIDER FOR