Resources: Blogs

Where there is smoke, is there fire?

Blogs
|

Drug and alcohol testing in the workplace

An increasing number of workplaces have introduced drug and alcohol policies which include random drug testing. These introductions are not always warmly welcomed.

An increasing number of workplaces have introduced drug and alcohol policies which include random drug testing. These introductions are not always warmly welcomed.

In the recent Fair Work Commission decision of Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union-Construction and General Division v Port Kembla Coal Terminal Limited [2015] FWCFB 4075, the Full Bench held that it was not unjust or unreasonable for Port Kembla Coal Terminal Limited (the Employer) to introduce a random drug testing scheme which included both urine and saliva testing methods.

It is clear that there is inherent tension and indeed various shades of gray area in the obligations of employers to ensure a safe work environment and the intrusion on the private lives of employees by random drug and alcohol testing.

However, it is also recognised that random drug and alcohol testing plays an important part in the detection and deterrence of the use of substances which may impair an employee’s ability to perform their duties safely and therefore creating a work health and safety risk for themselves or for others.

There are a number of issues which need to be considered and addressed prior to the adoption and implementation of a drug and alcohol testing policy, including:

  • The nature of the workplace: is the workplace a “high risk environment” e.g., are employees regularly involved in operating machinery or vehicles, or is it an office based environment with different kinds of risk?
  • The method of the testing to be used (e.g. will testing be conducted by using urine, oral, blood or a combination)?
  • When is testing to take place (e.g. at random times or upon reasonable suspicion)?
  • The accuracy of the testing: test results may reveal an employee’s past rather than current drug use (no current impairment), opportunities and methods of cheating may be available, for example the unfortunately all too true but still very funny clean bag of urine in the underpants;
  • The consequences of a confirmed positive reading: (e.g. is a zero tolerance approach to be adopted? Should a disciplinary process be commenced, having regard to procedural fairness?)
  • The welfare of employees: will any assistance be provided to the employee who returns a confirmed positive test (e.g. rehabilitation, access to employee assistance programs etc)?

 

As with the introduction of workplace policies to ensure the health and safety of employees, consultation with employees and other stakeholders (such as employee associations or unions) should take place.

While it is important for an employer to address drug and alcohol use in the workplace in order to discharge its work health and safety obligations, employers are also reminded that there is no “one size fits most” approach to managing employees who misuse drugs and alcohol.

 

Information provided in this blog is not legal advice and should not be relied upon as such. Workplace Law does not accept liability for any loss or damage arising from reliance on the content of this blog, or from links on this website to any external website. Where applicable, liability is limited by a scheme approved under Professional Standards Legislation.

 

Similar articles

Employer’s “tick and flick” training on workplace policies rendered dismissal unfair

Not just the what, but also the why

When relying on a workplace policy as grounds for dismissal, employers must be able to clearly demonstrate that the employee is aware of the policy and has undergone meaningful training on the policy.

Read more...

The importance of making policies accessible and easy to understand

Tell me in layman’s terms

Drafting workplace policies and procedures can be a daunting exercise – it requires a careful balance of including (or omitting) information that is necessary from a legal standpoint, whilst still remaining easy to understand and follow for employees.

Read more...

Fair Work Commission finds out-of-hours drink driving offence was not a valid reason for dismissal

Off the clock

Generally, the way in which an employee conducts themselves out-of-hours does not fall within the realm of what the employer can supervise or control. However, there are times where an employee’s conduct after business hours and away from work can impact the employment relationship.

Read more...

FWC upholds summary dismissal of employee who refused to provide medical information confirming fitness to work

If you refuse you lose

Where there are concerns about an employee’s fitness to work, employers may rely on terms in their employment contract which require the employee to comply with the reasonable and lawful direction to undergo a medical assessment.

Read more...

QIRC rejects unfair dismissal claim due to clear evidence of misconduct

Swear by it

Employers have a responsibility to address and manage poor conduct and behaviour which may expose other workers to work health and safety risks in the workplace. Implementation of effective disciplinary processes are vital in curbing such risks that may lead to a poor workplace culture, which may in turn create psychosocial hazards.

Read more...

Third maximum term contract role not substantially similar work

Not the same

Amendments to the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) limiting the use of fixed term and maximum term contracts prohibit employers from providing employees with successive term contracts, unless an exception applies.

Read more...

Let's talk

please contact our directors to discuss how ouR expertise can help your business.

We're here to help

Contact Us
Let Workplace Law become your partner in workplace law and sports law.

Sign up to receive the latest industry updates with commentary from the Workplace Law team direct to your inbox.

Subscribe

* indicates required