Make Your Drug Free Workplace Program an Asset Not a Liability

The main benefit of the “DFWP” is the Workers Compensation carrier can deny a claim based on a positive test for drugs. Since initial development of the “DFWP” in the states, case law and precedent have determined that the “positive” drug test results must be causal to the injury. This means, in simple terms, that if the employee is standing somewhere on the job and a brick falls on the employee's head, for example, the claim would not be paid even with a “positive” drug test result. This is due to the fact that the falling brick has nothing to do with the employee's intoxication. This is fair and leaves most accidents well within the realm of denial of the claim.

Prescription drugs that can affect one's ability to perform must be reported. Employers have the duty to place the employee in non safety sensitive positions, if applicable, for the course of the prescription.

Finally, training requirements vary from state to state; however, training in DFWP is required by all states; at minimum, employees are required to have initial and periodic training. Supervisors must have training in recognizing the signs and symptoms of alcohol and drug abuse and must be familiar with all related company policy and procedures. (I suggest annually for both)

Next, another troublesome finding with testing, I have found many companies selling “do it yourself testing” including hair, urine or saliva testing. The gold standard and all state programs rely on urine testing through a certified laboratory. A trained collector, along with a facility restroom dedicated and set up solely for drug testing is required. No matter the purported legality, the difference in cost of these types of “self tests” and a certified laboratory along with a medical review officer (MRO) is negligible considering what is at stake.

Regular review of your DFWP is highly recommended. Make no mistake about it; this is a very punitive program that has the ability to take a huge amount of coverage from an employee.  As such, the stakes are high, the company will be viewed in litigation as the “big bad wolf” after “the little guy employee”. However, the law is clear and case law backs this up. If all ducks are in a row, the company can expect protection intended by the law.  .