The Aspect of Drugs Testing Within the Workplace - Case Study Example

The Aspect of Drugs Testing Within the Workplace Student’s Name Institution Table of Contents Executive Summary………………………………………………………………………………3 A. Introduction...……..……………………………………………………………………….4 B. Mixed Reactions on The Current Effects and Risks of Drugs Use in Workplace...............4 C. Legal Risks Involved...…………………………………………………………………………………9 D. Steps Employed by Organisations to Establish Safety Value of Drug Testing Programs............................................................................................................................10 E. Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………….11 References………………………………………………………………………………………..12 Executive Summary The purpose of this paper is to examine the aspect of drug testing process within the workplace and find out its effectiveness and efficiency in the current operational environments. The discussion has indicated that the drug testing process is both beneficial but mostly expensive due to its implementation costs. Therefore, it is recommended that organisations should devise other cost-effective strategies like pre-employment analysis of potential applicants before embarking on the actual exercise. The paper also notes that drug testing programs should put the welfare of the employees first in order to prevent possible legal risks that can include compensation claims. The exercise should not be adopted by organisation as a way of countering possible liabilities but the main objective should be to create a safe operational environment. A. Introduction The recent reported increases in the level of personnel failing pre-employment drug tests means that the existing operational drug testing policies continue to be improved on a daily-basis to tackle possible rogue employees. Employers enjoy the capacity to alter their drug testing policies whenever they perceive its importance. In fact, they are allowed to introduce the policy even in cases where there is constant opposition from the employees (Harrop, 2015). However, the employer is called upon to always come up with drug testing policies that are deemed reasonable and fairly relates to the employees through provision of education on its requirements before implementation process. Notwithstanding, research indicates that the current need for drug testing is more sensitive and sharp than ever for purpose of ensuring that the sustenance of a safe workplace especially because of the fairly-documented course in relation to prescription and opioid use. Thus, the purpose of this paper is to examine the aspect of drug testing process within the workplace and find out its effectiveness and efficiency in the current operational environments. B. Mixed Reactions on The Current Effects and Risks of Drugs Use in Workplace Hilson (2014) notes that drug consumption in the workplace has continued to pose as a critical issue in safety-sensitive as well as other sectors including the white-collar industry. Employees that choose to go to work after drug use pose a serious health and safety issue within the place of work since all work conditions dictates for an overall cognitive and physical capacity prowess. Employers have a duty to make sure that the places of work are safe; employees are working effectively on unimpaired judgment in order to eliminate the level of risk they might pose to their respective colleagues. Numerous researches conducted on different personnel postulate that there has been a substantial increase in the level of marijuana use with detection tests indicating at least 71 per cent increase since 2012. Cannabis is deemed to be a drug of choice for many personnel because it is relatively cheaper in comparison to other drugs, readily available with some countries like the United States of America legalizing it and, also consumers tend to assume that its effects are ineffective in case they go to work the following day. Cannabis is considered to be the most detectable form of drugs for longer periods in comparison to other notable ones like methamphetamines. This means that even of consumed in the weekends, the drug can still be detected in the individual’s system between 24 and 48 hours afterwards due to higher concentration of THC. In the event that a user is considered to be a heavy one at that, then it means that the lab reports can come out positively weeks afterwards. Personnel with a higher level of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) pose a great risk for a potential risk of future impairment. This kind of risk is deemed to be a health and safety concern especially in cases where work duties involve operation of motor vehicles or even heavy machinery. Nowadays, workplaces adopt the oral fluid testing because it is relevant and reliable in testing components of drugs only when these drugs are active. However, debates have been made around whether a user will manage to make reasonable judgments long after consumption of Cannabis or even alcohol (Paton, 2004). The bottom line of this debate however rests on the fact that even though the user fails to note the effects of the drugs does not solely rule out their long term results. Users of Cannabis are thus encouraged to comprehend the fact that regular use or even occasional basis has the effect of impairing their level judgments long after consumption hence putting them at public risk. It is important to understand that the need for establishing stringent drug and testing policies in the workplace has led to a public outcry not only by employers but also by the larger personnel who are exposed to unimaginable levels of risk (Paton, 2004). The need has promoted numerous countries like the UK and US to come up with a Health and Safety Reform Bill that seeks to put more accountability on employers to avail safer workplaces and there will be stringent penalties for going against the rules and regulations. On the contrary, while it is a useful activity to formulate and implement drug-testing and monitoring program organisations are however; encouraged to ascertain their desired level of safety in the workplace by evaluating both the strengths and weakness of the overall practice at hand (Paton, 2004). Despite the practice having taken center stage for decades now, the process of quantifying the effects of drug testing on matters related to safety and health remains obscure. In essence, numerous researchers have continued to argue that the efficacy of drug testing should be tackled at the very point upon where aspects related to absenteeism and personnel productivity arises (Paton, 2004). Other researchers’ note that the efficiency of drug testing program highly depends with the form of industry a person works within since, some workers might not be productive after drug use but will not pose substantial levels of safety risk whereas others will cause impairment due to the heavy nature of their duties. Following this line of perspective, risks mangers are encouraged to evaluate comprehensive formulae in assessing the benefits of implementing a drug testing program in comparison to saving a company’s compensation premiums and those that could be countered by costs that relate to the entire program as a whole. Consequently, employers are advised against solely relying on drug testing policies and instead, they are encouraged to consider less costly techniques that include; integrity testing for potential personnel and personality-based frameworks given that most of the applicants that have completed integrity tests show early signs of undesirable behaviours like on-the-job illicit drug consumption. To say the least, employers continue to benefit from the recent drug-testing technologies that have enabled organisations to devise effective ways of tackling drug testing exercise. For instance, oral tests are deemed to be one of the most effective drug detection processes that yield instant results. Kenealy (2015) identifies the sensitivity of reagents employed on real-time tests of urine or oral fluids as being one of the most accurate techniques thus far. Instants are adopted in situations that call for quick screening of personnel before they can be allowed to operate under risk prone areas like in the case of oil platforms or even in construction sites. The author further notes that drug testing is only but a simple process since management must possess education and awareness functionalities that will help workers comprehend that the entire testing process is a significant part of the workplace safety program and, as a result, help eliminate possible chaos and conflicts (Gies & Grant, 2015). Subsequently, employers are encouraged to devise extensive employee assistance programs that are aimed at assisting existing employees with any of their addiction issues. A successful workplace prevention initiative will always take into consideration the benefits of including a workable EAP program to tackle cases of drug use (Kenealy, 2015). According to “Are You Spending Too Much on Drug Prevention Efforts” (2002), more workers dug testing exercise conducted indicate a higher increase in users. The periodical indicates that the exercise can help curb drug utilisation hence promote higher degree of safety amongst workers however; there are possibilities that the entire exercise might lead to unintended and negative consequence on the safety efforts. In fact, it is argued that the worker safety program that emanates from an organisation investing in drug related testing programs fails to offset the costs related to the whole exercise of implementation making it fundamental for the companies to cut down on imminent costs involved. The researcher is in agreement with most of other studies that employers will clearly postulate that a drug use testing confines with the desire to sustain a workplace safety issue. Research surveys conducted in 320 companies reported that at least 59 per cent of them operating in the manufacturing sector and 61% in health care industry conducted frequent drug testing exercise for all their respective employees (“Are You Spending Too Much on Drug Prevention Efforts”, 2002). By contrast, the drug testing exercise is perceived to be less frequent in lower-risk operational environments like for the case of insurance, finance and educational institutions. The figure below shows the rate of positive drug test exercise. Koster (2009) argues that integration of drug testing mechanism into an organisation is valuable approach to curbing lower productivity and thus, promotes a safer workplace. He notes that the employers that conduct regular drug tests on their employees are indeed contributing to a positive working environment (Koster, 2009). It helps to reduce possible fatality rates and, also the program has a direct effect on aspects related to productivity, time and product waste as well as customer relations. The author further notes that the exercise plays fundamental role in reducing the level of employee turnover. Subsequently, drug abusers go a long way to costing their employers a substantial amount of money especially in relation to medical and worker’s compensation claims (Koster, 2009). On the contrary, he notes that the exercise, in case conducted inappropriately, is perceived by employees as a gross violation of the privacy life and might lead to diminished morale and deeper resentment. According to “TUC Urges Clarification of Law on Drug Testing at Work” (2010), the existing drug testing techniques and models do not support employers into combating absenteeism. It thus goes without saying that having proper policies set in place that will deal with drugs and alcohol abuse in the workplace will play a critical role as opposed to introduction of randomised testing procedures that has the potential of breaching employee’s immediate right to privacy and integrity (Hadfield, 2006). C. Legal Risks Involved Drug testing programs always results to the risk of employers being taken to court over matters related to discrimination or breach of privacies. It is important that these employers engage in efforts meant to reduce this risk by way of promoting high degree of confidentiality, keeping employee’s outcome separate from a larger section of their respective employment information (Koster, 2009). For instance, it will be fair that a potential applicant’s drug test result should not be used to evaluate them on more than one different organisational position. In case that the information is needed by a third party then the employer should first obtain written consent. Organisational management team are thus advised to ensure that they keep a steady and uniformised policy that promotes a chain of custody to document the process that commences with handling to storage to prevent any further tampering of the document at hand (Koster, 2009). TUC Urges Clarification Of Law On Drug Testing At Work (2010) notes that there is a need for organisations to come up with new rules and guidelines related to drug testing in the workplace in a way that promotes the immediate welfare of their staff. They are also encouraged to spend their time resource coming up with comprehensive drugs and alcohol policies that go in hand to support staff at all times. D. Steps Employed by Organisations to Establish Safety Value of Drug Testing Programs First, organisations should make sure that possible post-accident testing does not flatten accident investigations. This is in effect whenever post-accident testing is considered to be standardised operational procedures prompting early termination of accident investigations (Oleson, 2004). There should be a further need to extend investigations on accidental evaluations to establish the true cause of risks as opposed to making immature conclusions as a way of reducing their liabilities to these accidents. Secondly, the organisation is advised against utilising money and other resources way from more beneficial safety programs. It should be understood that most of these tests are expensive and do not represent the best way of spending money for making personnel safe (Oleson, 2004). Efforts should be made to determine cost-effective notions on workplace safety as opposed to over-relying on drug tests. Thirdly, organisations are called to execute selective testing in case it is found out that there is occasional drug use amongst employees (Oleson, 2004). Selective drug testing cuts down on costs given that it facilitates the evaluation of randomly hired persons in the workplace mandated with performing high-hazardous duties. Fourth, it will be important to put the policies in writing through a memo so that all employees can access the information. These enlighten them from bringing drugs into workplace; an exercise that also acts to cut down on costs (Oleson, 2004). This rather low-cost strategy does effectively dissuade casual users from engaging in the act altogether. Another important way is to enforce workable rules and prosecution of culprits. Organisations should ensure that they take immediate disciplinary actions against all personnel that commit drug related offenses as par the laid-out policies in place (Oleson, 2004). E. Conclusion From the above discussion, it can be noted that drug testing programs can be beneficial to an organisation especially because it helps deters casual users of drugs however; there is no research indicating any significance to the hardcore users. There has been continual need to establish other cost-effect strategies as a way of curtailing the expensive exercise as a whole. Drug testing programs should also be formulated in a way that it involves the existing staff in order to curb possible chaos and conflicts from employees who might feel that their rights to privacy is curtailed and thus, dampen their morale needed for productivity improvement. The future of drug testing programs should be made cost-effective in order to combat matters related to absenteeism and work productivity. References Are You Spending Too Much on Drug Prevention Efforts? (2002). Safety Director's Report, 2(9), 2. Gies, T. P., & Grant, G. D. (2015). Legalization of Marijuana: What It Means for Employer Drug Testing. Employee Relations Law Journal, 41(1), 35-46. Harrop, M. (2015). Operating a Robust Workplace Drug Testing Policy. Human Resources Magazine, 20(3), 12-13. Hadfield, L. (2006). Drug tests. Occupational Health, 58(5), 17-18. Hilson, C. (2014). On-site Workplace Drug Testing. Human Resources Magazine, 19(2), 6-7. Paton, N. (2004). Workplace drug tests could become routine. Occupational Health, 56(8), 4. Kenealy, B. (2015). Drug and behavioural testing should be part of broad safety regimen. Business Insurance, 49(1), 0019 Koster, K. (2009). Drug tests: Accurate measures of impairment or ineffective invasions of privacy? Employee Benefit News, 23(14), 16-19. Oleson, C. (2004). Negotiating and Teaching Workplace Drug Testing: A Labor Perspective. Labor Studies Journal, 28(4), 67-86. TUC Urges Clarification of Law on Drug Testing At Work. (2010). Occupational Health, 62(7), 6. Read More