temp drug testing

karenmc · November 2003

Two temps involved in accident with machine. One I terminate the other goes to emergency room. I did not have him drug tested but am being questioned by other management why I didnt have him tested. It just felt right. Was I wrong? Your opinions please.

Parabeagle · November 2003

Depends on your policy. I am a firm believer in testing any employee who is involved in a work-related accident or injury. In my company, our policy is to always test post-accident. If you don't have a policy that outlines the circumstances in which employees will be tested, you may want to develop one. Just remember: If you do decide to test, you must be consistent in your testing. If you decide to test post accident, you must test everyone who is involved in an accident.

karenmc · November 2003

The policy only covers our employees not temps. We've never had a temp injured.

Parabeagle · November 2003

Then it's up to the temp agency to deal with the situation in accordance with their policy. It will go on their workers' compensation experience and if they have a policy of testing post-accident, so be it. Doesn't sound to me like you did anything wrong.

marc · November 2003

Does your policy call for mandatory drug testing following accidents, or is it totally at your discretion? If it is at your discretion, then you can open yourself up to criticism if your discretion can be shown to be discriminatory - even if it is not conscious on your part. If you determined the need to test one ee, got a positive result that led to a termination, but did not think testing was warranted in another circumstance, imagine the fun opposing counsel would have exploring the rationale for your decisions. Sounds like you are on thin ice.

TN HR · November 2003

OK, let me play devil's advocate here...If they're temps then the agency needs to handle that. I would steer VERY clear of this (from the sound of your post, you don't seem to be doing this since you used the term "I fired" when referring to temp employees), since co-employment is an issue you certainly would want to avoid in conjunction with a potential WC case.

Second, what does your policy or manual say about post-accident testing?

Gene

karenmc · November 2003

Fired was a term used in frustration over a careless act that could have been avoided had everyone been taking the proper safety precautions. The term I normally use is "released".

Don D · November 2003

[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 11-14-03 AT 02:44PM (CST)[/font][br][br]We recently started requiring our temp service to drug screen their employees before putting them on with us. I realized we were having some of them work several months and it was decided that we wanted them exposed to the same level of scrutiny and safety as those employees they work side by side with. Haven't had one injured yet, but would insist on drug screen if one was. I think we'll have it understood with the agency that they will be subject to our standard policy of drug screen post-accident and the agency will reimburse us for the cost of the test. That way, the test and payment will flow smoothly. Otherwise, the agency would have to set up a procedure with the clinic and that would complicate it all. It can all be worked out in an agreement and notice of understanding. Point is, why would we NOT want these temps to be drug free just like our employees?

(edit) It's my understanding that the temp would go on OUR OSHA 300 if injured.

POPEYE · November 2003

Your understanding is correct. The staffing employee is "under the ERs control and would go on the OSHA 300 log.

POPEYE · November 2003

I would ditto Parabeagle's post. It does not sound like you have done anything wrong other than use the word "terminate" in your original post which you have explained. Having been in the staffing industry for several years and now use 12-18 staffing employees on a regular basis, I would have acted exactly as you did.

karenmc · November 2003

Thank you all for your input.

earlru · November 2003

When it comes to drug testing a temp employee you run into a sticky situation when it come to legal liabilities. You should have set up with your temp service the protocol that on your request to have the temp service do the drug testing for the post accident.

Don D · November 2003

This practice has been run through legal counsel with no comments about legal ramifications. The expedient test is what we require, which typiclly will not allow calling the temp service and having them get involved. The clinic is a block away and the accident is 'owned' by the company and the OSHA record is ours. So, then , is the drug screen. I feel certain legal counsel would have instructed us otherwise had they felt differently.

temp drug testing

Comments