Workplace/Employment Drug Testing

Basic Data

(Prevalence of Employee Drug Testing) "The majority of human resource professionals surveyed in this brief study report that their organizations have a drug testing program; furthermore a majority of those respondents report some perceived benefits in reduced absenteeism and workers’ compensation claims, and increased worker productivity/performance. More than half of employers surveyed conduct drug tests on all job candidates, while only 29% do not conduct drug tests on any job candidates. In addition, most employers who use tests on job candidates have done so for seven years or more. When employers do post-employment drug tests, the most common tests are post-accident testing, random testing, and reasonable suspicion testing."

(Prevalence of Pre-Employment Testing) "When [human resource professionals were] asked if pre-employment testing was done prior to hiring an individual, a majority (57%) reported they test for job candidates, a slight increase in 2011 vs. 2010. The remaining categories of pre-employment testing, (selected candidates only, and positions required by state law) indicated a decrease in testing in 2011 vs. 2010 perhaps due to the slowdown in the economy. Thus, in 2011, 71% of respondents reported some category of pre-employment drug testing. However, the percentage of respondents who reported that their organizations do not conduct any pre-employment testing rose from 21% in 2010 to 29% in 2011. The companies were not asked the reasons as to why they did not drug test, but several reported that they did not believe in drug testing (see Figure 5)."

(Price of Tests) "As expected the average price for a drug test reported by the majority of respondents (67%) ranges between $20-$50. This would vary depending upon the drugs being tested, collection and shipping fees, and Medical Review Officer (MRO) services. The low end cost of $10-$20 reported by 15% of the respondents was most likely in-house instant urine tests."

(Type of Test Used) "When companies were asked what type of drug testing sample they used, the human resource professionals responded that 84% used urine as the sample of choice, with the test performed in an off-site laboratory. Only 24% responded that they used instant urine tests, only 6% used hair testing, and 5% used instant or off-site laboratory oral fluid tests."

(Trends in Prevalence of Employee Drug Testing) The American Management Association conducted surveys of workplace surveillance and medical testing throughout the 1990s and into the 2000s. In 1991, drug testing of some kind was conducted by 63% of companies surveyed, growing to 81% in 1996, falling to 66% in 2000 and then to 62% in 2004. Drug testing of new hires was conducted by 48% of companies in 1991, growing to 68% in 1996, falling to 61% in 2000 and then to 54.5% in 2004. Drug testing of current employees was conducted by 52% of companies surveyed in 1991, rising to 70% in 1996, falling to 47% in 2000 and then to 44.3% in 2004.

(Types of Companies Which Drug Test, 2000) The American Management Association in its 2000 survey on workplace surveillance and medical testing found the following percentages of companies which conduct drug tests:

(Prevalence of Workplace Drug Testing in the 1980s) The Bureau of Labor Statistics noted a high turnover in drug testing plans after a large survey of 145,000 businesses. It found that "overall about 1 of 3 establishments that reported having a drug testing program in 1988 said they did not have one in 1990." Further, "46 percent of the small businesses that reported having a drug-testing program in 1988 did not have one 2 years later."

Sociopolitical Research

(Post-Accident Drug Testing Discourages Accident Reporting) "If a substantial portion of the observed drop in [worker's compensation] claims [after implementation of the PADT - post-accident drug testing program] is driven by underreporting, however, PADT’s net effect on the Company and its employees is less clear. Not only may the administration of the PADT program itself be costly to the Company, but unreported workplace hazards could fester and, over the long term, impose even higher costs. Meanwhile, PADT may make accident reporting so costly for some workers that they opt to pay for medical care out-of-pocket or simply endure injuries that would otherwise be treatable through workers’ compensation. If many workers are covered by health insurance plans—particularly if they are covered on a family member’s plan—the costs of treatment could be shifted from the Company onto other benefits providers."

Workplace Drug Testing Laws & Policies

(Federal Legislative History) "In 1986, an Executive Order initiated the Federal Drug-Free Workplace Program that defined responsibilities for establishing a plan to achieve drug-free workplaces. In 1987, Public Law 100-71 outlined provisions for drug testing programs in the Federal sector. In 1988, Federal mandatory guidelines set scientific and technical standards for testing Federal employees. In 1989, the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) issued regulations requiring the testing of nearly 7 million private-sector transportation workers in industries regulated by DOT."

(Workplace Drug Testing Procedures and Cutoff Levels for Marijuana) "Workplace drug testing programs for marijuana in the U.S. generally observe the following procedures: a urine sample is collected – either announced or random – and screened for THC metabolites using an immunoassay test. Such immunoassays can be performed rapidly and at low cost, yet they are not highly specific for THCCOOH, the main metabolite of THC. If screening test results indicate the presence of THCCOOH above a specified 'cutoff' level (most commonly used is 50 nanograms/milliliter (ng/mL) or parts per billion (ppb), the sample is 'confirmed' by the more specific GC/MS (gas chromatography/mass spectroscopy) method. If GC/MS detects THCCOOH at levels above the confirmation cutoff, usually 15 ppb, a urine sample is considered 'confirmed positive'. Some employers and law enforcement agencies in the U.S. use a lower screening cutoff of 20 ppb and confirmation cutoff of 10 ppb. Very few drug-testing programs rely only on the outcome of a screening test and do not demand confirmation testing by GC/MS."

(Testing "Triggers") "Incumbent worker programs commonly include at least one of four testing triggers. Under 'reasonable cause' testing, an individual worker may be tested if her behavior reasonably gives rise to the suspicion of drug use. 'Comprehensive' testing involves the periodic, scheduled testing of all employees, such as during routine physical exams. 'Random' testing involves testing all employees (or particular groups of workers) on an unannounced and variable schedule (Hartwell et al., 1996). Finally, 'post-accident' drug testing (PADT) subjects any employee who reports a workplace accident (and sometimes co-workers who were directly involved) to a drug test at the time the report is made, regardless of whether the reporting worker’s conduct precipitated the incident."

(Employment At Will) "The allowance of employer drug testing is founded in the idea that employers have a legitimate interest in workplace safety.²² The employment relationship comes from the common law doctrine of 'employment at will' — that both parties to the employment contract can terminate the contract for any reason, at any time, unless otherwise specified in the contract."