Pubdate: Thu, 02 Nov 2000
Source: Herald, The (WA)
Copyright: 2000 The Daily Herald Co.
Contact:  P.O. Box 930, Everett, WA  98206-0930
Fax: (425) 339-3435
Website: http://www.heraldnet.com/
Author: Kate Reardon

EVERETT ENDS EMPLOYEE DRUG TESTS

EVERETT -- The city of Everett no longer requires job candidates to
take a drug test before starting work.

The revision in city policy comes after a recent state Court of
Appeals ruling that the city of Seattle's urine drug test requirement
violates the state constitution. The American Civil Liberties Union
had challenged the drug tests.

The decision applies to public employment. The ACLU has no plans to
challenge private workplace drug testing.

The decision has prompted other cities to change their
policies.

"As soon as we heard about the ruling, we stopped doing testing,"
Everett city spokeswoman Dale Preboski said. "Whether it's a good
thing or not is a whole other issue. We believed it was a valuable
tool."

Since 1989, future employees from librarians to maintenance workers
were subject to a drug test before starting work at the city.

There are jobs that will still be subject to drug testing, however.
Those positions include police, firefighters and workers who have
commercial driver's licenses. Those jobs deal with public safety and
were not challenged by the ACLU.

Everett was the only city in Snohomish County requiring drug tests of
all potential employees. Some other cities require testing only for
police, firefighters and people with commercial licenses.

Elected officials are not required to take drug tests and never have
been, city attorney Mark Soine said.

The change comes after a decision last month in which the state Court
of Appeals ruled that the city of Seattle's 1995 drug screening policy
for new employees was unconstitutional and a violation of privacy.

City firefighters are required to pass a physical and drug test before
being hired, Everett Fire Chief Terry Ollis said.

"There's a lot of different issues that you don't really think about,"
Ollis said. "We've had people whose vision has caused them to not be
hired. Drug screening is just one portion."

Everett will adopt a formal policy reflecting the changes soon, Soine
said.

The court ruling applied specifically to a Seattle ordinance. But
other cities have made changes since the judge's decision quoted
sections from the state constitution.

Since the decision, Tacoma and Bellingham have rewritten their
drug-testing policies.

Seattle's drug testing policy was challenged about three years
ago.

The ACLU filed a lawsuit in 1997 on behalf of eight city residents
challenging Seattle's drug tests. Included in the coalition was former
Seattle Mayor Charles Royer and Oscar Eason, president of the Seattle
chapter of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored
People.

The ACLU appealed a 1999 King County Superior Court decision upholding
Seattle's ordinance.

Now, the ACLU considers it a benchmark case, said Jerry Sheehan,
legislative director with the ACLU.

Soine said he's not aware of any cases in Everett where drugs have
become a problem with a city employee's job performance. The city
does, however, offer its employees assistance programs for drug
problems, he said.

In the 11 years of testing, drug test results were positive in only a
handful of applicants, said Sharon DeHaan, director of labor relations
and human resources.

On average, the city pays for between 25 and 35 pre-employment drug
tests each year, DeHaan said. Each test costs up to $40, she said.

Although the drug-test policy may have helped in filtering job
candidates, Soine said he believes the city can move forward with the
change since employees are responsible for their performance on the
job.

"We like to think at the city that we make good hiring decisions, and
we do some background checks on people," Soine said. "There's always a
possibility that we'll hire someone that may use illegal drugs, but we
look to making our decisions on an employee's qualifications and
ability to do the job."

Sheehan said a city that requires testing would be taking a legal risk
if it didn't change its policy after the recent ruling.

"They would be out on a legal limb totally naked," he
said.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Richard Lake