Page 34 - Occupational Health & Safety, February 2018

DRUG TESTING
Employers Must Put Safety First in a Drug-Friendly Culture
Marijuana is an impairing drug that has become substantially more potent since recreational use came into play, with some products containing upwards of 60 percent THC.
BY JO MCGUIRE
On Feb. 14, 2017, the National Organization to Reform Marijuana Laws (NORML) issued a press release announcing the formation of a multi-state workplace drug testing coalition,
serving as advocates for marijuana consumers’ rights against unfair drug testing practices in the workplace.1 NORML is the primary spearhead organization behind the strategy to legalize cannabis in the United States for four decades, but it seems that culturally acceptable, readily available pot is not quite enough—the next evo- lution is that use must be protected.
NORML considers any type of “suspicionless” drug testing to be unfair and went so far as to intro- duce legislation in Oregon and Washington to make testing for marijuana illegal. Both measures failed in 2017, but a return concept can be expected in the days ahead. The press release quoted California NORML Deputy Director Ellen Komp, repeating concerns of employees in marijuana-legal states, “Am I now pro- tected against drug testing on my job?”
Why is this concerning for employers? Why does it matter? And, more provocatively, why aren’t we talk- ing about the opioids epidemic instead of a little pot?
The NORML strategy matters because the effort to legalize marijuana, whether for ostensible medical or recreational purposes, is the tip of the iceberg in an effort to legalize all drugs. Breaking down barriers for this particular long game has come with a tremendous amount of misdirection and false statements regard- ing drug testing that now amount to an urban legend in the workplace. Causing employers to doubt their drug testing practices has been a huge coup for pro- drug advocates, virtually undermining the federal Safe and Drug-free Workplace Act and effectively creating a national whisper campaign that has intimidated em- ployers into backing down from safety as the priority.
When employee substance use, regardless of its stated purpose, is placed above public health and safety concerns, we have lost our way. Mountains of evidence show us that employees who report to work under the influence of drugs or alcohol contribute significantly to accidents, injuries, lost productivity, lost revenue, and increased workers’ compensation claims.2 In fact, according to the National Survey on Drug Use and Health, workers who are not in a drug testing program have substance use rates 50 percent higher than those who are subject to mandatory drug testing. We’ve all seen the data and yet, for some rea- son, we still think “it doesn’t happen here.”
Who is really tracking the data in your company,
and how do you know what may or may not be im- pacting your bottom line? Some employers are de- creasing or eliminating workplace drug testing pro- grams altogether because there are those who say it doesn’t work; however, the evidence largely disproves this theory.
Keith Swerdfeger, owner of Swerdfeger Construc- tion in Pueblo, Colo., has a robust company located in the heart of legal recreational marijuana territory and insists that maintaining a strong workplace drug and alcohol testing program has kept his employees from engaging in activities that would put their safety record at risk. Likewise, Reg Rudolph, who has been in the public utilities industry for 26 years in Pueblo, states, “We’ve had to make some major operational changes. Overall, from an HR perspective we’ve maintained a hard line on marijuana. So far, we’ve had no issues but we’ve been clear about our policy and interpretation.”
Fallacies and Facts About Testing
In order to maintain good policies, we must get the facts straight about workplace drug testing. While wonderful new strides are being made on the horizon of oral fluid testing, which can detect very recent mar- ijuana use, most workplaces still employ urinalysis, which has a strong evidential history and is still con- sidered the most viable option for U.S. Department of Transportation testing of safety-sensitive employees.
The largest fallacy is that one-time use of mari- juana “30 days ago” will result in failed urinalyses test results. This is where the “unfair” claims are made when employees use the excuse(s) of, “I was on vaca- tion,” “I was visiting Colorado, it’s legal there,” “I was at a birthday party and they served funny brownies,” or whatever garden-variety anecdote comes into play.
Regardless of the story, which is in and of itself a smokescreen, one-time use of marijuana is rarely de- tected in a urinalysis. The detection window must be very precise for this to occur. While it is absolutely cor- rect that metabolized marijuana settles in the fat cells and can be detected for weeks, that primarily refers to chronic or on-going cannabis use and not a one-time puff-puff-pass. This fact matters because continued use has an effect on safety. Marijuana that is stored in fat cells is also stored in the brain and can cause sub- acute impairment of multi-tasking motor-skills, mem- ory function, and ability to operate safely at work.3
Any drug test that detects THC reflects behavior that does not place safety first in the workplace. There are healthy boundaries that should be respected with
28 Occupational Health & Safety | FEBRUARY 2018
www.ohsonline.com