Do you work for an employer that uses random drug testing? If so, take note of the following

[BridgeTheGap]

it could save your job!
DUers - feedback appreciated on this situation that a friend of mine is in. He's a working class Joe that leans strongly to the left, a union member too.
-----------------------------------


Late last fall, a friend who works for a Kentucky distillery was called in to participate in a random drug test. As he describes it, he skipped on down the hall without a worry to volunteer his urine for testing. After all, he doesn’t smoke pot or do any illicit drugs, so what’s to worry about, right? WRONG!

A few days after the test, the company nurse calls him for a phone conversation with a physician who informs him that his test came back positive for marijuana. The results indicate that he is heavy user. He asks the physician how that could possibly be since he doesn’t use it? He admits to the doc that he has been around people who do smoke and asks if this could be the result of second hand smoke. “No,” the physician replies, “the results indicate personal usage, not second hand smoke.”

At this point my friend had two choices: 1. Since the urine sample was divided into 2 parts, the 2nd sample can be subjected to a more rigorous test for $100, which my friend would have to pay for. –or- 2. He will be immediately suspended from work with no pay and must attend a drug rehab program at his own expense.

Having no faith in the drug testing process at this point, he opts for #2, is suspended from work and begins attending a drug rehab program. He also visits his own physician for a problem with his knee that the physician had already been treating him for, which included future surgery. He informs the physician of his plight with the positive drug test. The physician informs my friend that the drug he had prescribed him for the inflammation in his knee, is known to trigger false positives in drug tests. The physician gives my friend a letter stating such.

My friend completes the drug rehab program and immediately goes for another drug test at his own expense which comes up negative. He takes the results to his employer. The reaction: “you’ve done something to clean yourself out.” (keep in mind here that the employer had (or has) the second half of the original sample that showed a positive result and could have tested it at THEIR expense, but did not). His employer then says, go to this lab that does the most accurate test and submit to testing there, again, at his own expense. He does and this test also comes back negative. Once again, his employer asserts that he probably “cleaned himself out.”

My friend lost 5 weeks pay over this and now has this entered on his record with his employer. If he tests positive again, he will be subject to immediate dismissal. The union he belongs to has refused any support.


What would you do?

[hlthe2b]

1. Your friend was nuts for not getting that second specimen tested

under chain of custody to an independent laboratory. He could then have made a case for reimbursement. I think he's screwed, frankly or will incur much greater expense clearing this up at this date.

Maybe someone else will be more optimistic. Sorry this happened.

[BridgeTheGap]

11. Yeah, I think he just freaked a bit. I think he was more affraid of allowing

them to test the second half of the sample because the first was wrong. I wondering what the protocol on drug testing is? I do feel that it should be the company's responsibility to pay for the better test. They really shouldn't do ANYTHING unless that 2nd test is also positive.
I also wonder if they asked prior to the test, if he was taking any drugs? I'll to ask him that.

[remedy1]

2. Your friend made a poor decision.

He should have had the "B" sample tested. When a split sample test shows a positive, the "B" sample is subjected to a more definitive testing process that includes MS/GC testing. MS/GC can differentiate many substances and would have probably confirmed the false positive in the initial test. By opting for rehab, the inference is that he knew he was positive, even though he may not have been.

The union has a legal obligation to defend him If they refuse, he should get some legal advice. He may have a case against the union.

[zipplewrath]

9. He made if very complicated

He should have approached the union first. He should have gotten the second sample tested. He should have gotten a lawyer immediately. He should have coughed up the $100. And when it was all over, he should have gotten money and letters. In the end he'd probably have gotten the whole stupid program shut down.

Now, well he needs the lawyer, he needs the second sample tested and when it comes out in his favor, he needs to go BACK to the union and then get letters and money.......

[tridim]

3. I would file a lawsuit immediately.

And after I won, I'd use the settlement money to buy an ounce or two of the kind.

[Warpy]

4. Sue

The letter from the doctor about the false positive from a medication should have been adequate to get him reinstated immediately and the offending result expunged from his employee record.

A retainer to a lawyer isn't that expensive and a nasty letter is all it should take to get the record cleared up. If he wants back pay and reimbursement for a useless drug program, he'll have to sue for it.

This is why random testing is so wrong. There are a lot of medications out there that will give false positive readings on a pee test. Anybody who is threatened with termination over a pee test should be offered the more expensive analysis at company expense. The urine test is worthless.

We had the random testing policy at my last place of employment but as a practical matter, it wasn't used unless an employee had been showing signs of impairment at work or if the narcotic count at shift change didn't add up.

[Richard D]

6. Even poppy seeds

The kind used on bagels and in various breads and pastries can cause false-positives.

http://www.snopes.com/medical/drugs/poppyseed.asp

[RaleighNCDUer]

5. Firebomb the boss's car? nt

[conscious evolution]

7. My advice-Lawyer up

There are many other pharmaceuticals that can cause a false positive for pot.I would also check the chain of custody paperwork and all seals on any specimen bottles.

[Gman]

8. One word: Organize

http://aflcio.org/

and work like hell for passage of the card check bill.

[luvspeas]

10. Your company must outsource for this service...

Whether they are using some sort of kit, or a subcontract, or even a testing company, I would go after them too. Anyone in the healthcare industry will tell you that it is negligent and dangerous and completely unheard of to rely on one test to determine anything.

The way it works is that the first test usually has a high sensitivity, and a low specificity. They are fast, cheap and easy and tend to have a high rate of false positives. The reasoning being that if you had HIV or cancer, it's better to have a false positive, than a false negative. Then the next concurrent tests have higher specificity and sensitivity so you can make an accurate diagnosis. If there are things that have been known to cause false positives in the tests, they need to have a questionnaire to discover these things.

That first test is going to have a high false positive rate and it will be well documented. It's like telling someone, we are going to give you a spelling test and if you get any wrong, we will definitely see it, BUT our checker sometimes (OK, maybe lots of the time) also thinks words spelled correctly are wrong too. If that happens, you will have to go buy a dictionary to prove them wrong.

It sounds like some flash in the pan subcontractor has convinced your company that they can use just one test and pass the bill on to the employee, killing 2 birds with one stone, getting rid of employees without paying benefits while having them foot the bill to prove it.

The company always thinks it's in their best interests to fight it out. My dad who worked a really hard and lousy job as a machinist, fell and did serious damage to his shoulder one month before retirement (and a pension). Even after going to the doctor, who recommended immediate surgery, they told him he had to return to work or he would be fired. Of course it was wrong, but they knew my dad didn't have much and probably wouldn't be able to get much of a lawyer, if he got one at all. So my dad drug himself and his shoulder to that job for 2 days, where they harassed him and gave him all kinds of difficult work to do. Finally the foreman told him to pick up a heavy piece of metal off the floor. My dad said, "you know I can't do it!" and the foreman said, "do it anyway, or you're fired." So my dad came home and thought it was all over. Good ending though - I told my friends what was going on, and one of their parents said, "Oh no! This is not going to happen!" and gave me the number of a GOOD lawyer who got my dad his pension, his medical paid (they weren't going to pay workman's comp either), and a quarter of a mil.

SO GO FORTH AND FIGHT THIS ONE!!!

[tandot]

12. Your friend would rather lose 5 weeks pay instead of paying $100 for the 2nd test?

I don't agree that he would have to pay for the 2nd test. Did the company have a policy to refund the money if the 2nd test turns out negative?

That sucks.

[BridgeTheGap]

13. He did not trust their drug testing and didn't want to pay for something that might

be the nail in the coffin. He should have contacted an attorney right away, though I believe his union told him he should file a grievance. I believe he did that but the Union then decided there was no merit to his grievance.