|
Where to Find? .....
DHHS Labs
The current list of DHHS
certified labs is published the first week of each month and is printed in the
Federal Register under the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services
Administration heading (SAMHSA). Only those labs certified can be used for FTA
drug testing. The list should be checked monthly as new labs are being added
and others are being removed.
Website location:
http:// www.workplace.samhsa.gov/
ResourceCenter/lablist.htm
To verify the certification status of laboratory, DHHS has established a
telephone HELPLINE (800) 843-4971.
The information presented on this page should be used to
update Chapter 2 of the revised Implementation Guidelines. |
US Supreme Court to Hear ADA/Drug
Rehab Case
On Monday, February 24, 2003, the US Supreme Court decided it would hear a
case that has the potential to impact all employers that conduct drug and
alcohol testing. The case will determine whether Raytheon’s Hughes Missile
Systems, Co. violated Joel Hernandez’s civil rights by refusing to rehire
him following a positive drug test and subsequent rehabilitation.
Hernandez tested positive for cocaine in 1991 and was
allowed to resign rather than be fired. Hernandez went through drug
treatment and in 1994 reapplied to Hughes. Hernandez was denied the
position because the company had a policy not to rehire previous employees
that were fired or allowed to resign in lieu of firing. Hernandez argued
that the company violated the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) by
refusing to hire him because of his past drug addiction.
The ADA protects individuals with disabilities from
discrimination. Current drug use is not protected by the ADA, but an
individual with a previous drug addiction that has been rehabilitated is
afforded ADA protections. The lower court sided with Hughes, but the US
Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit decided that since
Hernandez had been successfully rehabilitated he could not be denied
re-employment because of his past record of drug addiction. The company’s
appeal is based on the premise that many employers have no re-hire
policies, particularly those that deal with confidential government
contracts or with hazardous materials. They argue that the ADA does not
confer "preferential rehire rights." The court will hear the case next
fall.
Ohio Supreme Court Prohibits Testing Injured Workers
The Ohio Supreme Court recently
ruled that the Ohio’s worker’s compensation law that permitted drug and
alcohol testing of injured workers was unconstitutional. Under the law
employers were allowed to deny workers’ compensation benefits to any
employee whose injury was caused by use of a controlled substance or
alcohol. A refusal to test was treated the same as a positive test. The
court determined that the testing constituted a state action that violated
constitutional prohibitions against unreasonable search and seizure and
that the need for testing was outweighed by the expectation of privacy.
This case, however, does not address or in any way
discount federally mandated drug and alcohol testing programs. This case
was based solely on workers’ compensation benefits and does not address
the issue of public safety. The US Federal court system has repeatedly
held that drug testing employees that perform safety-sensitive job duties
does not violate the US Constitution as the need to protect public safety
outweighs an individual’s expectation of privacy.
The DOT regulations [§40.323(a)(1)] go on to say that
drug and alcohol test results can be released to the decision-maker in a
lawsuit, grievance or other proceeding initiated by, or on the behalf of,
the employee tested. This includes workers’ compensation, unemployment
compensation, or other proceeding related to a benefit sought b y the
employee when the test results are pertinent to the proceeding. How the
state administered workers’ compensation program deals with the
information and whether the information is taken into consideration when
determining extent of benefit that is due the employee is unique to each
state.
List of States Prohibiting Adulterants Expands
South Carolina was among the first states to
prohibit efforts to obstruct or interfere with alcohol and/or drug tests.
The law, enacted in 1999, makes it illegal to sell or possess adulterants,
substitute specimens, or spike a specimen. The law makes it illegal to
give away or sell urine with the intent to beat a drug test.
Louisiana, Nebraska, New Jersey, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania,
Texas and Virginia have each enacted similar laws, and the issue is
currently under consideration by the Arkansas General Assembly. There is a
grass roots movement to encourage other states to consider similar laws. |