Mandating workplace drug testing
Although increasing in popularity among employers, such tests are not always legal. Supreme Court The United States Supreme Court has held that both blood and urine collection are minimally intrusive procedures which are not harmful to job applicants or employees, when they are conducted in the employment environment (such as where applicants or employees are required to go to a doctor's office to provide a sample) without direct observation by the tester.The following discussion provides information on when (and whether) a drug test may be used in the pre-employment phase. In other words, it may be an invasion of privacy for an employer to require a job applicant to provide a urine sample while other people are in the room watching.This Act basically states that any employer who receives federal grants or contracts must be drug-free, or it risks losing the federal funding.
You’ll find answers to your FLSA compliance questions, plus detailed guidance to help you manage requirements and keep your costs under control during this transition.The goal of testing is to deter illicit drug use and identify students who misuse prescription or over-the-counter drugs or use illicit drugs so they can get help.Perhaps the largest legal, social, and economic issue in the workplace is the use of drugs and alcohol.From the employer's perspective, illicit drug use by employees results in greater absenteeism, decreased productivity and other negative factors.Also, many employers enact pre-employment (and sometimes post-hiring) drug testing procedures to protect against liability for the actions of their workers.
Search for mandating workplace drug testing:
For example, the Department of Transportation has regulations that require drug testing of more than 8 million different employees, such as truck drivers.