Workplace Drug Testing on the Rise

Drug testing employees is controversial, especially for jobs that don’t involve driving or operating machinery.

More and more employers are asking their staff to undergo drug tests – from trades, to professionals and even retail workers.

There is no law against asking employees to undergo drug tests and, indeed, it may be a condition of their employment contracts.

Drug testing is supposed to reduce health and safety risks to workers and the community, and ensure that customers and clients are getting the best possible service.

On the other hand, many see it as an unjustified infringement of their civil rights, and claim that having residual drugs in the system does not affect performance in all jobs.

So how common is drug and alcohol use at the workplace?

And what sorts of jobs should be tested?

Which workplaces have the highest drug and alcohol use?

One study found that the industries most likely to have workers using drugs or alcohol at work include hospitality, construction, tradespersons, financial services and unskilled workers.

There is a strong argument that those whose jobs involve driving or using heavy machinery should be subjected to on-the-spot drug tests at work, after-all such intoxicated could lead to fatal consequences.

But perhaps the argument is a little less convincing for unskilled workers who perform routine tasks, and those in the hospitality, as the safety concerns may not be as grave.

What are the rules for the public sector?

In the public sector, being intoxicated at work normally constitutes misconduct if it adversely affects a worker’s performance or the safety of colleagues or reputation of the Australian Public Service.

According to the Courts, the Commonwealth government can’t regulate out-of-work conduct that doesn’t impact on the job, as this is the only area that it has a ‘legitimate interest’ in regulating.

But the Public Service Code of Conduct states that using illicit substances is not allowed at any time, whether at work or otherwise.

Perhaps it could be argued that if employees are using drugs, it could have an impact on the reputation of the public service.

Or to use another example, the Commonwealth Immigration Department believes that having government officials involved in illicit drug use may carry a risk of corrupting

Australia’s border protection.

Does drug testing at work decrease drug use?

One expert, Dr Donna Bull, believes that drug testing in the workplace is a waste of time and money.

She says that the mandatory drug tests of thousands of public servants in the Immigration Department costs an enormous amount of money.

In order to have a realistic chance of detecting drug-users, Bull believes that up to 5,000 public servants would have to be tested annually.

And she doesn’t believe it is a deterrent either, stating there is no conclusive evidence of its effectiveness.

On the other hand, companies which provide drug tests predictably claim that they can dramatically reduce the number of employees using drugs.

There are currently 8,500 workers at the Immigration Department, and all were told before Christmas that they would be tested.

Out of the 2700 Customs officials who were tested for drugs and alcohol between 2013 and May 2014, 10 of them tested positive.

Negative effects of drug testing in the workplace:

Some drug-users, afraid of being caught by a workplace test started, may start switching to synthetic drugs, which do not show up in most tests.

However, synthetics can be even more potent and dangerous than their natural counterparts.

There is also a potential risk that some users may switch from cannabis, which can be detected for weeks or even months after its use, to drugs like cocaine or amphetamines that are processed more quickly.

And of course there is the ‘morale’ argument – after-all, the workplace is meant to be a place of mutual trust, rather than somewhere that employees fear being accused, stigmatised and persecuted for their activities outside working hours.