Drug Testing (Employment)
Related Chapters:
1. Drug Positivity Rates Of US Employees Subjected to Urine Drug Tests, by Worker Category According to Quest Analytics, the drug positivity rates for US employees subjected to urine drug tests are: "Quest Diagnostics Drug Testing Index™ Full year 2016 tables," Quest Diagnostics, Table 2, p. 2, last accessed Nov. 13, 2017. |
2. Prevalence of Pre-Employment Drug Testing in the US "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)." Fortner, Neil A.; Martin, David M.; Esen, S. Evren; and Shelton, Laura , "Employee Drug Testing: Study Shows Improved Productivity and Attendance and Decreased Workers’ Compensation and Turnover," Journal of Global Drug Policy and Practice (2011), Volume 5, Issue 4, p. 6. |
3. Prevalence of Pre- and Post-Employment Drug Testing of Workers in the US "Drug and alcohol testing continues to be an important part of screening both before and after hire. Fifty-eight percent of respondents indicated their organization conducted drug and/or alcohol screening, and this number jumped to 62% for respondents with organizations of more than 4,000 employees. "Employment Screening Benchmark Report, 2014 Edition," HireRight, Inc., March 2014, pp. 21-22. |
4. 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." Fortner, Neil A.; Martin, David M.; Esen, S. Evren; and Shelton, Laura , "Employee Drug Testing: Study Shows Improved Productivity and Attendance and Decreased Workers’ Compensation and Turnover," Journal of Global Drug Policy and Practice (2011), Volume 5, Issue 4, p. 16. |
5. Drug Test Positivity Rates for Methamphetamine Among US Workers Subjected to Drug Testing "Amphetamines (which includes amphetamine and methamphetamine) positivity continued its year-over-year upward trend, increasing more than eight percent in urine testing in both the general U.S. and federally-mandated, safety-sensitive workforces compared to 2015. Throughout the last decade, this rise has been driven primarily by amphetamine use which includes certain prescription drugs such as Adderall®. "Quest Diagnostics Drug Testing Index™ Full year 2016 tables," Quest Diagnostics, Table 2, last accessed Nov. 13, 2017. |
6. Drug Test Positivity Rates for Heroin and Other Opiates Among US Workers Subject to Drug Testing "After four straight years of increases, in 2016, urine testing positivity for heroin, indicated by the presence of the 6-acetylmorphine (6-AM) metabolite, held steady in the general U.S. workforce and declined slightly among federally-mandated, safety-sensitive workers. "Quest Diagnostics Drug Testing Index™ Full year 2016 tables," Quest Diagnostics, Table 2, last accessed Nov. 13, 2017. |
7. 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." Fortner, Neil A.; Martin, David M.; Esen, S. Evren; and Shelton, Laura , "Employee Drug Testing: Study Shows Improved Productivity and Attendance and Decreased Workers’ Compensation and Turnover," Journal of Global Drug Policy and Practice (2011), Volume 5, Issue 4, p. 18. |
8. Type of Drug Test Used By Employers "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." Fortner, Neil A.; Martin, David M.; Esen, S. Evren; and Shelton, Laura , "Employee Drug Testing: Study Shows Improved Productivity and Attendance and Decreased Workers’ Compensation and Turnover," Journal of Global Drug Policy and Practice (2011), Volume 5, Issue 4, p. 15. |
9. Drug Positive Rates In Combined US Workforce, 2013 and Trends "Methamphetamine Positivity Increases Across All Testing Types "Workforce Drug Test Positivity Rate Increases for the First Time in 10 Years, Driven by Marijuana and Amphetamines, Find Quest Diagnostics Drug Testing Indextm Analysis of Employment Drug Tests," Quest Diagnostics, September 11, 2014, last accessed March 6, 2015. |
10. Employee Drug 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." Morantz, Alison D., & Mas, Alexandre, "Does Post-Accident Drug Testing Reduce Injuries? Evidence from a Large Retail Chain," American Law and Economics Review (Cary, NC: American Law and Economics Association, August 23, 2008) , Vol. 10, No. 2, p. 248. |
11. Prevalence of Marijuana Use Among Full-Time Workers in the US " An estimated 6.4 percent, or 7.3 million, of full-time workers reported use of marijuana during the past month (Tables 2.2 and 2.3). Larson, S. L., Eyerman, J., Foster, M. S., & Gfroerer, J. C. (2007). Worker Substance Use and Workplace Policies and Programs (DHHS Publication No. SMA 07-4273, Analytic Series A-29). Rockville, MD: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Office of Applied Studies, pp. 15-16. |
12. Prevalence of Illicit Drug Use Among Full-Time Employees in the US, " The prevalence of past month illicit drug use among adult full-time workers was 8.2 percent (Figure 2.3 and Tables 2.2 and 2.3). Larson, S. L., Eyerman, J., Foster, M. S., & Gfroerer, J. C. (2007). Worker Substance Use and Workplace Policies and Programs (DHHS Publication No. SMA 07-4273, Analytic Series A-29). Rockville, MD: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Office of Applied Studies, p. 12. |
13. Reported Educational Achievement and Income of Drug Using Versus Non-Using Full-Time Workers " Workers with a college education had a lower prevalence of current illicit drug use compared with those without a college education. The prevalence of past month use of illicit drugs was lower among those with higher levels of education than those with less education (college graduate [5.7 percent] vs. less than high school [11.2 percent]) (Figure 2.6 and Table 2.3). Larson, S. L., Eyerman, J., Foster, M. S., & Gfroerer, J. C. (2007). Worker Substance Use and Workplace Policies and Programs (DHHS Publication No. SMA 07-4273, Analytic Series A-29). Rockville, MD: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Office of Applied Studies, pp. 12-15. |
14. Prevalence of Illicit Drug Dependence or Abuse Among Full-Time Workers in the US " Approximately 3 million full-time workers (2.6 percent) aged 18 to 64 met the criteria for past year illicit drug dependence or abuse (Figure 2.3 and Table 2.4). Larson, S. L., Eyerman, J., Foster, M. S., & Gfroerer, J. C. (2007). Worker Substance Use and Workplace Policies and Programs (DHHS Publication No. SMA 07-4273, Analytic Series A-29). Rockville, MD: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Office of Applied Studies, p. 17. |
15. Prevalence of Heavy Alcohol Use Among Full-Time Workers in the US " An estimated 8.8 percent, or 10.1 million, of full-time workers reported past month heavy alcohol use (Figure 2.3 and Tables 2.2 and 2.3). Larson, S. L., Eyerman, J., Foster, M. S., & Gfroerer, J. C. (2007). Worker Substance Use and Workplace Policies and Programs (DHHS Publication No. SMA 07-4273, Analytic Series A-29). Rockville, MD: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Office of Applied Studies, p. 16. |
16. 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." Morantz, Alison D., & Mas, Alexandre, "Does Post-Accident Drug Testing Reduce Injuries? Evidence from a Large Retail Chain," American Law and Economics Review (Cary, NC: American Law and Economics Association, August 23, 2008) , Vol. 10, No. 2, p. 296. |
17. 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. American Management Association, "AMA 2004 Workplace Testing Survey: Medical Testing" (New York, NY: American Management Association, 2004), p. 2. |
18. Drug Testing vs Impairment Testing
"Few employers have used impairment testing, and information concerning that experience is very limited and extremely difficult to obtain. The available information, however, indicates that impairment testing is not just a better answer on paper, but in practice as well. Employers who have used impairment testing consistently found that it reduced accidents and was accepted by employees. Moreover, these employers consistently found that it was superior to urine testing in achieving both of these objectives." National Workrights Institute, "Impairment Testing: Does It Work?" (Princeton, NJ: NWI, undated). |
19. Limited Use, Availability of Impairment Testing "Collecting information about the performance of impairment testing proved extremely difficult because the field is so small. Only a handful of companies have ever marketed impairment testing systems and there is no list of their names. However, the Institute conducted an extensive networking program based on our contacts in the field that identified what we believe to be every company that has ever marketed impairment tests. There are only 10 such companies. Of these, only 6 manufactured systems for employers. Three of these 6 are now out of business. This means that there are only 3 companies currently in business that provide impairment testing systems for employers. National Workrights Institute, "Impairment Testing: Does It Work?" (Princeton, NJ: NWI, undated). |
20. Federal Legislative History Workplace Drug Testing Laws & Policies "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." "Clinical Drug Testing in Primary Care," Technical Assistance Publication (TAP) 32, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Clinical Drug Testing in Primary Care (Rockville, MD: U.S. Departent of Health and Human Services, 2012), p. 4. |
21. Drug Testing and "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." Smith, Melissa K., "Drug Testing: A Solution Looking for a Problem," Michigan League FOR Human Services (Lansing, MI: March 2012), p. 5. |