Random Drug Testing

Does anyone have any statistics on random versus pre-employment drug testing?

We are in the process of updating our Drug Policy and considering adding random testing to our current practice of pre-employment, post accident and reasonable suspicion. However, once the numbers were crunched and the additonal drug testing costs to be incurred were analyzed, it was suggested that we do away with pre-employment and implement random [keeping post accident and reasonable suspicion in place]. Several of our managers feel strongly that we would catch more abusers on a random basis than via pre-employment.

Does anyone out there have a program like this in place? All of my training taught me that an effective program contains all forms of testing... but tasked with researching this option, here I sit....

Any input would be greatly appreciated.

Comments

  • 6 Comments sorted by Votes Date Added
  • I would discourage randoms in lieu of pre-employments. I think the message you're sending is strong. Chronic users and abusers will flock to your place knowing fully well the odds are in their favor that they won't get caught in your random pool for a long time.

    Gene
  • I agree 100%. We do both. You definitely don't want to take the chance from a safety standpoint of hiring a current user. Check with your W/C insurance carrier and see if you can get a reduction in your rates for having both a pre-employment and random policy.
  • I am surprised that managers are making the decision based on how much it costs??? or from your write up it seems this way? Also, unless you do a lot of hiring, I would think it would be less expensive to do pre-employment.
    I agree with the other two. I would definitely do pre-employment/post offer vs random if I had a choice. First it is much easier to administer and why would you want to employ someone who has a problem, just in hopes you can "catch them later on". Don't give them the chance to even start employment with you. You will end up with attendance, insurance, behavior and other problems that you will be writing to us asking how to solve.
    Also, you don't mention if you have any DOT requirements with your jobs. This could change things. The other 2 posters mentioned the W/C aspect. TN and GA have this (discount) but I don't know about PA. (NC, CT, CA, TX, CO do not.)
    I will be glad to email/fax you a copy of our policy if you email/post your address/number.
    [email]ewarthen@newcombspring.com[/email]
    E Wart
  • HR Rosie. I agree 100% with the other posts.

    There are a ton of analogies that fit your situation. One that comes to mind is this: Let's say I own a trucking company with 1600 tractor trailers and 2300 drivers. We have had one major colision in the past five years resulting in loss of life. My company is self insured up to one million dollars and purchases an excess insurance policy for costs above that. We paid out $1 million to the family of the man our driver killed and our insurance paid an additional $2.5 million.

    Our CFO had all the bean counters analyze all sorts of things. He reported to me that we had spent a total of three million in the past ten years on insurance, truck inspections and repairs, driver background checks, drug screens and training programs. He concluded that we had wasted the difference in $3MIL and the $1MIL spent on one measely accident.

    His recommendation to me was that we stop training, background checks and drug screens and cut our inspections and repairs in half and dump our excess insurance policy. His logic was that we were spending way too much on all this stuff when all we had was one wreck.

    I see absolutely no difference in this imaginary scenario and the one your managers recommend to you.
  • I also agree with the others. Both pre-employment and random would be nice, but don't give up pre-employment.

    We do both, and our positive numbers look something like this:
    Random positives: a few over the past 5 years
    Pre-employment positives: a few each year
  • ROSIE:
    It has been my experience that your ease of ridding the company of a drug user for whatever purpose is stronger with pre-employment screening of everyone. We only do random selection for drug testing with our DOT required drivers. We do mandatory testing of all accident/injury events that cost us over $1.00 to put the employee back to work. Random testing has only caught 1 person in 6 years, that is because our drivers are professional drivers with credentials to loose. Besides they don't have time to fool around with party drugs. We have caught many young men and a few women with the pre-employment screen test. Pre-employment is well worth the money spent by the company to get a non-user on-board!

    PORK
Sign In or Register to comment.