Pubdate: Sat, 27 Jan 2001 Source: Savannah Morning News (GA) Copyright: 2001 Savannah Morning News Contact: P.O. Box 1088, Savannah, Ga., 31402 Fax: (912) 234-6522 Website: http://www.savannahnow.com/ Forum: http://chat.savannahnow.com:90/eshare/ Author: Shannon Lynch PASS OR FAIL? Businesses Increasingly Require Urine Samples For Employment (con't) In some respects, drug testing could cost businesses money, Hough said. "There are significant indications that the disadvantages to employee morale might outweigh the advantages of a drug-testing regime in cases where public safety is not paramount," Hough said. "It also makes it more difficult to recruit. Many workers are off-put, whether drug users or not, by a drug-testing regime, so recruitment and retention may be impaired." Though most businesses absorb the costs of drug testing, those that make employees pay for them also could have trouble attracting and retaining workers, Hough said. And some workers might avoid companies they think invade privacy. Privacy rights The ACLU opposes drug testing as a violation of the U.S. Constitution's Fourth Amendment ban on unreasonable searches. "As politicians fight a war on drugs, we as a nation are willing to do almost anything to protect ourselves from the big picture of drug use -- a picture that's probably wildly exaggerated," Seagraves said. "Drug testing is invasive, unethical, immoral and unconstitutional." Some local businesses support their employees' right to privacy. "I think that's a personal choice if someone wants to do drugs, as long as it doesn't interfere with their work," said Jerry Duke, who owns printing company Jade Business Forms. "I think drug testing is an invasion of privacy." Also, many tests enable employers to find out a lot more about applicants than whether they're on drugs, such as whether they're pregnant or whether they smoke, Balsley said. A person taking Ritalin for Attention Deficit Disorder might test positive for amphetamines, he said -- not necessarily something you want to share with a potential employer. "It should all be kept confidential, but you have to be careful," Balsley said. "Whether someone is taking medication is their business and their doctor's. The employer needs to watch out how they do those screens." But Wade doesn't think workers have any civil rights in the workplace, he said. "I hear folks moaning and groaning all the time about their civil rights -- 'You violated my right to privacy,' " he said. "Well, what about my rights? Don't I have the right to work in a safe, drug-free environment?" But Seagraves says the two aren't mutually exclusive. "We live in a country with freedom and it's always a balancing act -- how much of your freedom are you willing to give up to feel safe?" she said. "Is it always someone else's freedom you're willing to give up? Blanket drug testing is a poor way to determine someone's ability to work." Kennickell, however, says it is the best way, and he has no concern for his employees' right to privacy in regards to drug testing. "Business is business -- I don't need to handicap myself with people who are a danger to themselves or others," he said. "I'm not the least concerned about their rights. I'm paying them money and they have the right not to work here." The law Kennickell runs a private company and can set his own drug-testing policy. But there are some laws that govern who must be drug tested, how and when. The U.S. Department of Transportation requires 8 million transportation workers with safety sensitive jobs to be tested for drugs and alcohol. Last year, 0.3 percent of DOT employees randomly tested were positive. That's 22 out of 7,833 employees, the agency reported. Many whose jobs fall under those requirements say they understand the need for drug testing and don't mind it because they don't use drugs. Jerry Nesmith has been driving trucks for four and a half years, and he has been drug tested three times. "It doesn't bother me; I pretty much expect it," Nesmith said. "They have to make sure you're clean before you get behind the wheel to cover the company's butt if you get in an accident." The Savannah Airport Commission tests many of its employees under Federal Aviation Administration guidelines, said Dan Coe, assistant executive director. "The airport is always looking at the most innovative ways to increase safety to the flying public," Coe said. "Everything we do centers around safety and security, and our employees come to work trained to think that way." Though the Savannah police and firefighters are exempt from federal drug-testing laws, they're still tested randomly because they asked to be, said Chris Wilburn, coordinator of the city's Employee Assistance Program. Most other city employees also don't fall under federal drug-testing requirements, but they're tested anyway. All employees have to pass a pre-employment drug test. Anyone thought to be under the influence of drugs or alcohol can be tested under reasonable cause testing. The city does five to 10 of these a year, Wilburn said. Most turn out to be alcohol-related problems. City employees in safety-sensitive jobs also are tested randomly. Last year, the city did about 700 of those tests, at a cost of around $14,000, Wilburn said. That was up from 1999, when the city did 570 random drug tests, 21 of which were positive. Because the city is self-insured, there is no workers' compensation discount. Most city employees accept being drug tested as part of life, Wilburn said. "Who's going to tell you they like being drug tested?" he said. "But it's a necessary evil." At least some city employees don't object. Michelle Brown has worked for the city for almost three years and had to get a drug test before she was hired. Her job isn't safety sensitive -- it involves data entry. "It wasn't bad," Brown said of the test. "The nurse stood outside the door, so I was in the bathroom by myself. I just couldn't wash my hands until after I got out." But employees in other cities have resisted. In Seattle last year, eight people sued to stop drug testing for all municipal employees. In October, the Washington Court of Appeals ruled the city's random urine testing was an unjustified invasion of personal privacy, since it was not tailored to meet safety needs. ACLU Atlanta staff attorney Robert Tsai said he thinks Savannah city employees might have grounds to file a similar challenge. "The government can only drug test where there is significant risk of danger, like if you're driving a school bus or operating a crane," Tsai said. "In general, people enjoy protection from searches and seizures in the absence of evidence they have committed some wrong. With blanket or random drug testing, that's the antithesis of having specific information." Each business must decide for itself whether the cost -- actual and potential -- of testing employees is worth it. "My approach is that drug testing should be driven by the requirements of the job," Hough said. "Drug abuse is a rather common situation in this society, but it certainly isn't the cause of all low productivity or other problems in the workplace." Who does it Major Savannah-area employers that drug-test employees: * Memorial Health University Medical Center: 3,500 employees * St. Joseph's Candler Health System's: 3,600 employees * The city of Savannah: 2,000 employees * Savannah Airport Commission: 105 workers - --- MAP posted-by: Kirk Bauer