January 30, 2013
Legislators in Montana heard a bill last week that would expand drug and alcohol testing to all working people in the state. Bill sponsor, Republican Champ Edmunds of Missoula says the bill will help reduce workers compensation rates for employers.
Edmunds says, “This only allows, it doesn’t require drug testing. It just allows drug testing, the same way it does now and I think the end effect of this will be a reduction in workers comp. rate. I know that right now if you show the workers comp insurance companies that you have drug testing in place it reduces your rates.”
Edmunds says the bill would also reduce the amount of injuries in the workplace. Several opponents spoke against the bill, saying it violates citizens’ constitutional rights.
Why is drug testing in the workplace important?
Many question the fairness in employment drug testing, and they have a fair argument to hear. However, when considering the risks employers are putting themselves at without a drug testing policy, common sense certainly suggests it’s in their best interests.
Check out a few facts that highlight the significance of drug testing in the workplace:
- More than six percent of the population over 12 years of age (13.9 million people) has used drugs within the past thirty days.
- Seventy-three percent of all current drug users aged 18 and older (8.3 million adults) are employed. This includes 6.7 million full-time workers and 1.6 million part-time workers.
- Of the 11.2 million heavy drinkers in the USA, 30 percent (3.3 million) also were current illicit drug users.
- According to a national survey conducted by the Hazelden Foundation, more than sixty percent of adults know people who have gone to work under the influence of drugs or alcohol.
- Alcoholism costs 500 million lost work days each year, while alcohol and drug abuse cost the economy hundreds of millions of dollars a year.
If you’re considering implementing a drug screening policy but looking for more information first, get in touch to find out how to ensure your business is protected from drug and alcohol abuse.
December 12, 2012
Teachers at an independent special school in the UK are on strike after one of them was asked to take a random drugs test. Eleven teachers at the Alderwasley Hall School, which is a residential centre as well as a school, took action last week.
Their union, the NASUWT, says one teacher was suspended after refusing to take a test, while the union also says other members of staff have been threatened with dismissal if they were to refuse. Chris Keates, the general secretary of the NASUWT, said: “It is simply unacceptable for an employer to impose a policy of drug and alcohol testing which we believe is unjustified and unlawful and attacks the professionalism of the teachers at the school.
“There is no basis whatsoever for believing that dedicated and committed teachers at Alderwasley Hall School are misusing drugs or alcohol. This is simply a case of an employer abusing its position and flagrantly disregarding the rights of its employees.”
The union says the school’s policy on drugs tests is unlawful under human rights legislation because it allegedly breaches a person’s right to respect for their private life, while advocates of drug testing suggest those who are clean have nothing to fear.
Government guidelines say employers have to have consent from staff they want to test for drugs and that tests should be random, and it seems questionable that it’s a group of teachers that are taking this particular stance. Children are the one of the most vulnerable sectors of society, and we should be taking every precaution possible to ensure their safety. On top of that, the fact that the children at this school require special needs means that protection and support is even more of a necessity from those who care for them.
September 21, 2012
The University of Oregon is implementing random drug testing of all its athletes, following a media report earlier this year that estimated from 40 to 60 percent of the football team smoked marijuana.
Oregon’s previous drug policy allowed for drug testing when there was reasonable suspicion. A recent decision by the general counsel gives temporary permission for random testing effective this month. The policy still faces a public hearing in early October.
ESPN The Magazine’s April report was based on interviews with 19 current or former Oregon players and officials, and it accompanied a larger piece that looked at marijuana use among college football players nationwide.
In July, Oregon’s athletic department proposed the changes to strengthen its drug policy. Under it, student-athletes will be subject to random tests year-round, even in the summer. A number system will identify athletes for testing.
The random tests have not begun, according to university officials and Oregon has not changed its penalties for positive tests.
For illicit drugs, athletes receive counseling and education after a first positive test. A second results in a ”behavior modification contract” between the student and the coach. Athletes are ineligible for half of a season following a third failed test, and will be dismissed from the team and lose their scholarship for the fourth.
For performance-enhancing drugs like steroids, athletes face suspension after the first positive test and dismissal after the second.
Do you believe all college athletes should be drug tested? Should they be held to the same standard as professionals?
September 12, 2012
As part of any drug testing policy, there are a variety of drug testing procedures involved in a pre-employment screening program: a company’s procedure for employee testing, state and federal procedures for legality of testing, and the different types of procedure involved in drug testing, to name just a few.
For this blog post, we are going to focus on the latter – the different types of procedures that might be used in drug testing. There are three types of procedures for drug testing, and they are as follows:
1) Urine Testing
Urine tests are the most common method of drug testing, and the most affordable. They are administered by obtaining a urine sample from the subject, and considered an intrusive method of testing – meaning that the samples could potentially be contaminated or the results can be affected by the testing process.
Urine tests are generally effective in detecting evidence of drug use during the week prior to testing, meaning that they are susceptible to the effects of a subject abstaining from drug use in an attempt to control the results.
2) Blood Testing
Blood tests are the least common method of drug tests, usually because they are the most expensive for businesses. However, blood tests are heralded as the most accurate form of a drug test.
Usually administered by obtaining a blood sample from the subject and assessing the samples to detect evidence of drug use, blood tests are also considered an intrusive method of drug testing and can detect recent drug use.
3) Hair Follicle Testing
Hair follicle testing is middle-ground in terms of expense, and can usually detect drug use in a longer time frame than the other two methods – approximately 90 days. Hair follicle tests are administered by obtaining several strands of hair, and are considered unobtrusive methods of treatment because it is difficult to alter any traces of drugs present in the hair strands.
While those are the three primary types of drug testing procedure, we’re only really touching the surface of these methods. If you have any further questions, or would like to find out how to implementing any of these procedures at your business, get in touch with us here.
September 03, 2012
Seven-time Tour de France winner Lance Armstrong has finally given up fighting the doping claims aimed at him by the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency. After years of allegations, he has walked away from the doping case the USADA brought against him, calling it an “unconstitutional witch hunt” and declining to fight it in arbitration.
“If I thought for one moment that by participating in USADA’s process, I could confront these allegations in a fair setting and — once and for all — put these charges to rest, I would jump at the chance,” Armstrong said in a lengthy prepared statement Thursday evening. “But I refuse to participate in a process that is so one-sided and unfair.”
USADA CEO Travis T. Tygart reacted to reports of Armstrong’s decision not to enter arbitration, stating:
“It is a sad day for all of us who love sport and our athletic heroes. This is a heartbreaking example of how the win-at-all-costs culture of sport, if left unchecked, will overtake fair, safe and honest competition, but for clean athletes, it is a reassuring reminder that there is hope for future generations to compete on a level playing field without the use of performance-enhancing drugs.”
Armstrong will now face a lifetime ban and the stripping of his tour titles, according to the USADA. However, he argued that he never failed a drug test and that the USADA should not have the right to strip him of his titles.
Considering he was one of the most tested athletes in history, how did he cheat if he never failed a test?
A former teammate, Jonathan Vaughters, confessed his own doping on the New York Times opinion pages just two weeks ago, writing, “When I was racing in the 1990s and early 2000s, the rules were easily circumvented by any and all.” This suggests drug tests were easy to pass, and the screening process was weak.
Through it all, Armstrong vigorously denied any and all hints, rumours and direct accusations he was cheating. It seems that the public will never know the truth behind the scandal. For now, we can take gratification that sporting authorities are working incredibly hard to implement thorough drug screening programs, and doing their best to keep cheating athletes out of the industry.
August 29, 2012
Ensuring you have a safe, productive and efficient work environment is an integral part of a strong foundation for business success. This includes aspects such as management techniques, team morale and hiring strategy.
For this post, we are going to focus on the latter – hiring strategy – and more specifically, drug testing. A drug testing policy is vital for any business, to help ensure that those you hire are safe and sober, and that your employees remain that way once hired.
Implementing a drug testing policy can be tough, so here are MYB’s five steps to creating a successful policy for drug testing your employees:
1) Examine your needs
Before investing in a drug testing program for your workplace, first identify the drug abuse risk in your organization. Have you noticed a decrease in productivity,-an increase in absenteeism, or accidents by your employees? Are your insurance and workers claims costs soaring?
Consider the specific areas it is that you want to improve with a drug testing policy, and that’s your starting point.
2) Understand the law
Some state and federal laws can make setting up an employee drug testing program difficult, so make sure you know your stuff. If necessary, get your legal team involved and ensure you’re not putting your company at risk.
3) Get help
No one knows more about drug screening policies and programs than a pre-employment screening company, so don’t be afraid to ask for help. They will be able to help you create a thorough, effective and affordable testing policy for your company, leaving you free to focus on sustaining and increasing business.
4) Process
With the above done, it’s time to create the actual process. Again, this is where an employment screening company is going to help. The process needs to involve getting employee consent, written policy, legal issues and HR processes.
If you’re a beginner, this is what’s really going to help you get to know what a drug screening program is all about.
5) Specifics
So now we’re down to the specifics. What type of test are you going to perform? What’s the company and legal process if a test result is positive? Or negative? How are you notifying current employees about the drug screening program? How are you integrating it into your current hiring strategy? Once again, a professional screening company can really take the load off with this stage of the policy and implementation.
Ready to get started?
So those are our five tips, and we hope this helps you to understand what a drug screening policy is all about. If you’re ready to get started, or you have more questions about drug screening, feel free to get in touch. We’ll be happy to help!
August 17, 2012
Colombian 400m runner Diego Palomeque has become the latest in a long line of athletes to formally be excluded, banned or disqualified from the 2012 London Olympics after a failed drugs test. Palomeque gave a urine sample that tested positive for testosterone. He has stated that the result was caused by him injecting himself with a homeopathic product that he believed included no banned substances.
“It’s always a sad day when a cheating athlete is caught… the message is very clear: If you’re doping we’re going to catch you,” International Olympic Committee spokesman Mark Adams told the Associated Press before the start of the Games.
More than 5,000 blood and urine samples were tested for banned substances at this year’s Olympics, more than any previous games. The testing took place about 20 miles away from the competition sites, at the laboratories of GlaxoSmithKline in the town of Harlow as part of a collaboration between GSK and the Drug Control Center at King’s College London.
So far, at least nine other athletes have been expelled from the Olympics due to failing a drug test, either before – or during – the Games.
“This is about the integrity of London’s Games,” Olympics minister Hugh Robinson told The Telegraph in January. “Anybody who watches in person or on television wants to know that what they are seeing in front of them is a true and fair contest.”
After winning the 100 meters final in Seoul in 1988, a reporter asked the Canadian sprinter, Ben Johnson, what was more precious: a world record or the gold medal? Johnson chose the latter.
“Why?” the reporter asked.
“Because it’s something nobody can take away from you,” he replied.
The message coming from London 2012 organizers this year was, “Yes we can, and we will.”
It seems like they fulfilled that promise.
August 03, 2012
Olympic organisers have said their drug testing programme is strong and “if there are cheats, we will catch them”.
Doubts were raised over the performance of Chinese gold medallist Ye Shiwen but she said she would never use banned substances and British Olympics chief Lord Moynihan said she was “clean”.
US coach John Leonard – the executive director of the World Swimming Coaches Association – said her performance was “unbelievable” and “disturbing”. But there is no evidence against her and all medal winners are drug-tested.
Ye Shiwen herself claims: “There is no problem with doping. The Chinese team has a firm policy so there is no problem with that.”
Culture Secretary Jeremy Hunt said London 2012 has “some of the most rigorous, if not the most rigorous, anti-doping procedures in place for any Olympics”.
International Olympic Committee communications director Mark Adams told a separate news conference: “We have a very strong drugs testing programme. And we’re very confident that if there are cheats then we will catch them.”
Adams said there had been 1,706 tests so far, of which 1,344 were urine and 362 were blood. The first five athletes are tested automatically and then two others at random, he said.
Before the Olympics even started officials were implementing these strict rules, with sprinter Debbie Dunn having to withdraw from the games due to a failed drugs test.
July 20, 2012
We highlighted recently just how seriously Olympic authorities were taking ethics at London 2012 – with more than 6,000 samples expected over the course of the games.
It seems that the influence of drugs, and the ferocity of drug screening procedures in place, have already begun. Sprinter Debbie Dunn recently withdrew from the U.S. Olympic team after failing a drug test during the selection trials last month.
U.S. Anti-Doping Agency
After trials on June 24 in Eugene, Oregon, the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency informed her that a sample she gave contained an elevated testosterone/epitestosterone level. Artificial testosterone can be used to enhance performance by growing muscle.
“While I work with Usada to resolve this matter, I am withdrawing from my relay pool position for the 2012 Olympic Games,” Dunn said. “I do not want any issue like this to distract from my teammates’ focus for the biggest meet of their lives. I wish Team USA best in London as I work toward resolving this matter.”
The testosterone/epitestosterone, or T/E, ratio is used to check whether the naturally occurring substances are within normal limits. Usada is testing a second urine sample, Travis Tygart, chief executive officer of the Colorado Springs, Colorado-based organization, said in a statement.
“Usada appreciates Ms. Dunn voluntarily removing herself from the Olympic team while the full facts surrounding her elevated T/E ratio and adverse carbon isotope ratio analysis are evaluated,” Tygart said. “As in all cases all athletes are innocent until and unless proven otherwise.”
Dunn was the world indoor champion in the 400 meters in 2010, when she was also the U.S. outdoor champion. She would have been competing in her first Olympics.
Thorough screening procedures
Over the course of the games, the scientists will be tasked with analysing more than 6200 samples for as many as 400 banned substances across a range of pharmacological categories. Perhaps the toughest challenge is the rapid turnaround time required, with the majority of negative results set to take less than 24 hours to be announced.
July 02, 2012
With less than a month to go before the 2012 Olympics in London, we thought we would take this opportunity to explain a little bit about the drug screening procedures in place, and how the process is managed on such a vast scale.
The process
We have been told that 150 scientists will be working around the clock to test up to 400 blood and urine samples per day. About half of the athletes competing this year will be requested – without notice – to provide samples for testing, including all medallists. Most samples taken will be urine, but 1000 or more will be blood, according to David Cowan who heads the Olympic testing team.
Avoiding mistakes
To avoid any mistakes all samples will be barcoded, so that the testing centre knows where any sample is at any time and who is handling it. Each sample will be divided at the point of collection between two tamper-proof bottles labelled A and B. If the testing team gets a positive result from repeated tests on an A sample, the B bottle will be opened and analysed.
Challenges
Over the course of the games, the scientists will be tasked with analysing more than 6200 samples for as many as 400 banned substances across a range of pharmacological categories. Perhaps the toughest challenge is the rapid turnaround time required, with the majority of negative results set to take less than 24 hours to be announced.
All in all, it’s quite the process! With more than 6000 drug screens being performed over the 18 day period, we applaud those who are responsible for implementing these tests. Fingers crossed most samples are clean and we get to witness an exciting and enjoyable Olympics 2012.
Next Page »
