It’s Everyone’s Obligation
To test or not to test…it is not a question. Rather it is an obligation for both employers active in recruiting and every employee on the payroll team. In the business world, survival of the fittest is the general rule. Therefore, a company has its own interests and agenda to protect. This, in addition, to the health and well-being, safety and security of all humans in the work environment.
Unlike employees, a company implementing a drug-screening program has enormous responsibilities and multi obligations that cannot be overlooked or ignored. The U.S. federal government in respect to privacy rights and legal aspects mandates some of these especially if an employee proves positive for illicit substances. We advise those who do not understand or possess knowledge in respect to these obligatory requirements should consult a professional source for further information before implementing such a background check program.
An employee, on the other hand, has little if anything to contribute to a drug-screening program with these two obligations being the exceptions:
An employee must:
1. Remain drug and alcohol free.
2. Take the screening test when ordered.
The actual intended purpose of this article is to promote a basic respect for employment drug screening by presenting the issues surrounding such program implementations for both the employer and employee. Yet, despite the hardships an employer will certainly encounter it is important to highlight why such drug screening is necessary.
For instance, employers can be held accountable for failing to protect those who enter their environment. Which means avoidance and protection from harm for non-employees, employees, and customers must be at the forefront of the many reasons why a program implementation is a good idea. In the event of injuries, or harm, workers comp claims, medical costs and providing new training for new workers due to the injured party being unable to remain on the job can prove costly. In the event of death, whether or not criminal charges are filed, civil suits for wrongful death have a hefty price tag attached.
Employers already know the problems which substance abuse introduces into the work environment. Some of the hindrances may be as minor as late arrivals, decreased productivity levels, and poor performance in general. This lends support for an employer to take a pro-active stance to fight substance abuse for the betterment of its employees in the work force but also in respect to its own pursuit of profit, worker productivity and protection of self-interests. Take a good look at the current work force profile:
* 77 percent of illicit drug users in America are currently full time employees somewhere.
* Approximately 10 percent of America’s workforce, some 14.9 million full and part-time employees, regularly abuse or are dependent on alcohol or drugs, according to the 2003 National Survey on Drug Use and Health.
* It is estimated an employee with a substance abuse problem is 3.6 times more likely to suffer a work place injury than an employee who is not under the influence.
* An estimated 15 percent, or about 19.2 million employees, drink on the job or before work, according to the University at Buffalo’s Research Institute on Addictions.
* Gender harassment in the workplace increases two-fold when an employee drinks during work and office hours.
Employment drug screening programs may be a necessary burden, one that quickly adds to an employer’s costs of doing business. Written policy and procedures must be established in respect to employees and while the complaints of “right to privacy” have little merit neither do those posters in the employees lounge. Anti-drug sentiments of “Just Say No” lack the same mmph that accompanies a drug screening test policy. Besides, those who refuse to “take one for the team” really have no vote at all anyway.
Tags: background checks