A public employee established a Fourth Amendment violation by several individual supervisors of his former employer when they selected him for reasonable suspicion drug testing – and later discharged him — based on an unreliable anonymous tip. Greer v. McCormick, 2:14-cv-13596 (E.D. Mich. April 10, 2017). The Plaintiff, Ralph Greer, was a former employee of … Continue Reading
Requiring employees to submit to directly observed reasonable suspicion testing and falsely reporting to third parties that the employees were tested because of reasonable suspicion may give rise to claims for invasion of privacy and defamation, according to two recent decisions by the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana. Cook v. Warrior Energy … Continue Reading
The Unified Government of Wyandotte County/Kansas City, Kansas did not violate a public employee’s Fourth Amendment rights by requiring the employee to submit to a random drug test or by terminating his employment when he tested positive for cocaine, according to a recent decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit. Washington … Continue Reading
The highest court in West Virginia recently affirmed the dismissal of a lawsuit in which an employee challenged the decision to terminate her employment after she refused to submit to a reasonable suspicion drug test. Layne v. Kanawha County Board of Education, No. 16-0407 (W.VA. Feb. 17, 2017). The case highlights the right way to … Continue Reading
An appellate court in Kansas ruled that an insufficient urine specimen, without evidence of intent to thwart the drug test, is not a refusal to submit to a test for purposes of the Workers’ Compensation Act. Byers v. Acme Foundry, 2017 Kan. App. LEXIS 12 (KS. Court of Appeals January 27, 2017). Mr. Byers was … Continue Reading
A municipal employer that conducted hair follicle drug testing on police officers was not entitled to summary judgment on a Title VII disparate impact claim, because a reasonable jury could conclude that an alternative to hair follicle drug testing would have met the employer’s legitimate needs, according to the United States Court of Appeals for … Continue Reading
A federal appeals court upheld November 16, 2016 the decision of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) that an employer violated Section 8(a)(1) of the National Labor Relations Act by denying an employee the right to the physical presence of a union representative before consenting to take a drug test, and by discharging him for … Continue Reading
An employer that terminated an employee based on its honest belief the employee violated its drug policy was entitled to summary judgment on the employee’s Americans with Disabilities Act claim, according to a Kentucky federal court. The court also granted summary judgment to the employer on the employee’s failure to accommodate and wrongful discharge claims. … Continue Reading
The Occupational Safety and Health Administration published a memorandum on October 19, 2016 that explains statements made about post-accident drug and alcohol testing in its commentary to the Electronic Recordkeeping Rule, i.e., “Improve Tracking of Workplace Injuries and Illnesses,” which was published in May. Among other things, the rule prohibits retaliation against employees who report … Continue Reading
In another win for employers with regard to medical marijuana use by employees, a Massachusetts state court rejected a former employee’s legal claims under the state’s medical marijuana law. Barbuto v. Advantage Sales and Marketing, LLC, et al., No. 15-02677 (Mass. Sup. Ct. May 31, 2016). The plaintiff, Christina Barbuto, possessed a valid medical marijuana prescription … Continue Reading
According to a new study published by Quest Diagnostics today, positive workplace drug test results have been increasing steadily every year since 2011, and made up 4% of all workplace drug test results in 2015. The Quest Diagnostics Drug Testing Index — an annual survey of workplace drug test results — examined nearly 11 million drug … Continue Reading
The U.S. Department of Transportation’s Federal Railroad Administration (“FRA”) recently announced a final rule expanding drug and alcohol testing applicable to maintenance-of-way (“MOW”) employees, effective one year from the date of the rule’s publication (which has yet to be announced). MOW employees work directly on and around railway tracks and crossings, maintaining the tracks, bridges, … Continue Reading
Today, OSHA’s final electronic recordkeeping rule, “Improve Tracking of Workplace Injuries and Illnesses,” was published in the Federal Register. A detailed discussion of the rule can be found here on our OSHA Law Blog. In the final rule OSHA states that “blanket post-injury drug testing policies deter proper reporting” and concludes that: “the final rule does … Continue Reading
A federal court in Pennsylvania has allowed an employee to proceed with a wrongful discharge/invasion of privacy claim related to her discharge after a positive drug test result. Wilkinson v. Marvin E. Klinger, Inc., Case No. 4:15-cv-01916, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 58340 (M.D. PA. May 3, 2016). Plaintiff, a 58-year old school bus driver, was … Continue Reading
The Rhode Island Supreme Court has held that a three-year statute of limitations applies to claims alleging violations of the employer drug testing statute in that state. Goddard v. APG Sec.-RI, LLC, No. 2014-239-Appeal (R.I. Mar. 7, 2016). Rhode Island’s employer drug testing statute provides employees with a right to be free from drug tests … Continue Reading
A federal appeals court in Minnesota has held that the Minnesota drug testing statute applies to an applicant tested in Minnesota, even though the applicant was being hired for a job in another state. Olson v. Push, Inc., No. 14-3160 (8th Cir. Feb. 22, 2016). Push, Inc., a Wisconsin corporation, hired Olson, a Minnesota resident, … Continue Reading
Although an employee clearly refused a drug test under an employer’s drug and alcohol policy, an appellate court in Alabama remanded the case to the trial court because the employer’s policy did not clearly define the testing methods to be utilized, which was an important component of determining the employee’s eligibility for unemployment benefits. Austal … Continue Reading
An employer’s reliance on a positive alcohol test was held to be a legitimate and non-discriminatory basis for termination, despite the terminated employee’s argument that the test result was inaccurate. Clark v. Boyd Tunica, Inc., 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 35223 (N.D. Miss. March 1, 2016). Plaintiff, a line cook at Boyd Tunica, Inc., underwent a … Continue Reading
With the beginning of a new year, it is time to make resolutions and review old, outdated workplace policies. Employers who conduct drug and alcohol testing should consider updating their drug and alcohol policies in 2016, particularly if they have not done so in several years. Here are the top 10 reasons why: Medical Marijuana Is … Continue Reading
Motor carriers subject to Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration drug and alcohol testing requirements in 2016 will have to conduct significantly fewer random drug tests for drivers of commercial motor vehicles (CMVs), including certain trucks and buses, and spend less money on that testing, the U.S. Department of Transportation agency said recently . The FMCSA … Continue Reading
A deaf employee who tested positive for hydrocodone – but could not produce a prescription for the drug – was not discriminated against due to his disability when his employer fired him. Phillips v. PPG Industries, Inc., Case No. 5:14-CV-1274 (N.D. Alabama Nov. 24, 2015). Phillips was employed as a “finisher” in a manufacturing facility … Continue Reading
A federal court in Utah upheld the termination of an employee who did not disclose his use of prescription medication in accordance with his employer’s policy. Angel v. Lisbon Valley Mining Co., Case No. 2:14-CV-00733 (D. Utah Nov. 23, 2015). Angel was employed as a haul truck driver at Lisbon Valley Mining Co., a copper … Continue Reading
A federal court in Georgia rejected an employee’s claim that his termination after a positive drug test result for barbiturates was discriminatory. Roman v. Leggett and Platt, Inc., Case No. 3:14-CV-20 (M.D. Ga. Nov. 3, 2015). Roman worked in a safety-sensitive position and was subject to random drug testing. He tested positive for phenobarbital, which … Continue Reading
We have written previously about the National Labor Relation Board’s 3-2 decision in Browning-Ferris of California, Inc., 362 NLRB No. 186 (August 27, 2015), increasing the likelihood the Board may find two employers to be “joint employers,” and thereby share many collective bargaining responsibilities as well as liability for each other’s violations of the National … Continue Reading
