Posted By Jay Aitch We have both alcohol and drugs testing Policy in place. Initially tests are carried out prior to offer of employment with all potential employees irrespective of position; management or shopfloor, being tested. However, with drugs unfortunately being more acceptable to todays generation as a way of life, they know the obvious ways of ensuring clean tests. Unless there are obvious signs like needle marks or bare skin around nostrils (not always good indicator), a period of time away from the drugs and alcohol prior to any test can give a clean reading. In addition to this we 'did' have policy for random testing of all employees. All testing was in negotiation and full agreement of site union. However, it is now obvious that random testing (agreement is same percentage of shopfloor and management) that there could be key figures who test positive. Considering the expense of training etc it has been deemed that we could have a situation where key management are occassional users and fail. Failed tests would result in instant dismissal. The company, again with union agreement have instead changed policy to those employees who it is suspected of being under influence of alcohol or drugs whilst at work, be requested to take a voluntary test with our contracted medical services. The test being carried out in front of a union and management representative. Failure being instant dismissal. We employ 320 persons and it has been deemed due to costs that anyone failing either test be dismissed rather than requested to undergo relevant programme of drugs or alcohol treatment (though I do believe that the union does offer these services). Though our policies and contract of employment have been drawn up to consider such things as data protection act and human rights, I believe a serious challenge to any policy would show some infringement.

Posted By G Ford As has been mentioned previously,there are many forms of over the counter medicene that contain metamphetamines, night nurse slimming tablets, these will in turn show up in a drugs test.As a rule most testing is based around urine or blood tests however the most foolproof way of drug testing at work is through hair sampling. It basically acts as a diary and can show up drug use from 3- 6 months previously.I believe its due to sweat that inlays into the hair and follicle.Considering that some class A drugs can be clear of your system within 24 hours ( cocaine 24 hrs,ecstacy 3-4 days ) cannabis approx.1 month ( for moderate to heavy users ) it proves a preferred method of testing.It is well known that 'clean' urine samples are available from the internet for people at work who are sampled. I personally believe that counselling and 2 way participation is the way forward with regular testing if someone is found to be positive for drugs or alcohol.By acting in a positive manner and dealing with issues 'together' then the employee has every opportunity to address the problem. Obviously the company has to be seen to be showing due dilligance in protecting their staff from possible H&S issues in the workplace.As has already been mentioned if the tests are voluntary what are the repurcussions for non compliance? I think its fair to say,it must be visible that if someone is suffering from drug/alcohol problems then their performance is likely to suffer - attendance - performance - attitude - approach to work, this is an issue which if identified early enough can be tackled early enough. There are some excellent workplace drug alcohol courses for companies these days as its an escalating problem throughout society.

Posted By Alec Wood I noticed recently that in the USA where such testing has been commonplace for a number of years, that many people are now successfully suing employers for wrongful dismissal. Drug testing has many problems, some highlighted by the previous posters. Cannabis has been quoted as residual for one month above, but other studies have shown the presence of urinary cannabinoids six to eight weeks after exposure. Maybe the difference is due to the method of use, ingestion or inhallation, maybe other factors like frequency of use, individual health etc. Also, there is the question of accidental exposure to consider. Prescription medicines are a big potential source of false-positives, but in the US coedine, routinely available in the UK as an analgesic usually mixed with paracetamol, is looked upon as a serious drug issue. Some foods can also give false positives. Channel four recently showed someone testing positive for heroin following the consumption of poppy-seed cake, and another who ate seed garnished bread rolls or similar. Both these people ate a large amount of the foodstuff in question, but it opens an interesting line of defense for anyone dismissed for testing positive. Obvious incapability may be regarded as sufficient for dismissal, or catching someone actually in the act of using which happened here once. Physical indicators may prompt a counselling chat from HR, but until more is known about the decay of drugs within the body then I think you'd be on dangerous ground. Personally I would keep a close eye on the Police and the circumstances under which they are willing to prosecute drivers. If they cannot rely on their kits and labs to determine exposure time and levels to a degree satisfactory for prosecution, then how can companies rely on the much less sophisticated kits available to them.

Posted By Raymond Rapp Anthony, I too have worked in the rail industry for many a year, but unlike the previous respondent I am not so sure D&A testing has been so succesfull. For a start there are many 'over the counter' medicines which will show up or may cause drowsiness e.g. Codeine based. Therefore preventing the person from normal duties. Also there have been incidents where class A drugs have been detected, which turned out to be poppy seeds from buns sold in the canteen! As mentioned there have been cases where the employee has won at an ET for refusing to provide a sample after being dismissed. Only recently a driver refused a test after a so-called incident because he was going home. Only the police have the power to detain. The truth is it is much disliked and seen by most employees as an infringement of their civil liberties. Personally, I think D&A testing should be used only for the most severe of accidents/incidents and not in any random form. Ray