Don't “just say no” to drug testing in the workplace: Some recommendations for developing and implementing policy

The widespread use of contraband substances by organizational members continues to present policy makers with a plethora of legal, moral, and economic issues to contend with when designing and implementing a comprehensive substance abuse policy. This article addresses methods of drug testing and their relative advantages and limitations, the legal ramifications of policy decisions, including union and nonunion concerns, and the costs and benefits associated with drug testing and screening. General guidelines for the design and implementation of a substance abuse policy are offered, and it is suggested that organizations should not summarily dismiss drug testing as a vehicle for the control and elimination of contraband substances and their use in the workplace.     

Supervisory and nonsupervisory employee attitudes about drug testing

Both supervisory and nonsupervisory employees are divided in their support for drug testing n the workplace. Comparisons are drawn between employee attitudes displayed in this study with student and public attitudes reported in previous studies. Factors associated with employee attitudes toward drug testing include: occupational group, acceptance of related employer disciplinary rules, interest in training on assisting those with substance abuse problems, and the timing of discipline and referrals for assistance. The implications of these findings for drug-testing programs are discussed.     

A model of employee responses to drug-testing programs

Testing employees for drug use is an increasingly widespread organizational response to the problem of employee drug abuse. Despite this, little attention has been given to its effects on employee attitudes and behavior. This paper reviews the issue of drug testing in industry, provides a theoretical model of employee perceptions of and responses to drug-testing programs, and offers an agenda for future research directions.     

Electronic Monitoring to Promote National Security Impacts Workplace Privacy

This paper explores electronic workplace monitoring in light of the USA PATRIOT Act—federal legislation with a national security focus that expands the likelihood of electronic workplace monitoring to assist government investigators. The paper examines federal laws that cover the privacy rights of at-will employees in the context of electronic workplace monitoring, including recent cases that have narrowed employee privacy rights. The paper argues that business justifications for electronic workplace monitoring have been bolstered by national security concerns, resulting in decreased expectations of privacy in the workplace for at-will employees. There are persuasive arguments that employers should exercise restraint in the use of information obtained through electronic monitoring in discipline and discharge decisions related to at-will employees. These arguments in favor of exercising restraint flow from the text of the USA PATRIOT Act and consider the risk of discrimination lawsuits.     

Predicting On-the-Job Substance Abuse with a Written Integrity Test

This paper explores definitions and predictors of employee substance abuse, using 173 employed undergraduates who completed a prominent written integrity test and a self-report of work behaviors, including on-the-job (OTJ) alcohol and drug abuse. Approximately 21% of participants reported recent OTJ abuse and were significantly more likely than nonabusers to exhibit other counterproductive work behaviors. Validity coefficients for the integrity test's Employability Index (r = –.25) and Drug Avoidance Scale (r = –.39) suggest that such measures can reduce OTJ abuse, but the procedure's effectiveness may be limited by the high rate of false negatives. We discuss suggestions for improving psychological testing to reduce OTJ abuse.     

Employee drug testing: A constitutional perspective

The proliferation of employee drug testing by federal and state governments and by private sector employers acting pursuant to governmental directives has led to a steadily growing number of lawsuits raising constitutional challenges to such testing. Most of these cases have been based on the Fourth Amendment's prohibition of unreasonable searches and seizures. In 1989, the Supreme Court addressed the constitutionality of employee drug tests for the first time in two cases,Skinner v. Railway Labor Executives' Ass'n andNational Treasury Employees Union v. Von Raab. Recognizing that urinalysis drug testing constitutes a search for Fourth Amendment purposes, the Court determined the constitutionality of the drug tests by balancing the governmental interest in the testing against the privacy interest of the employees and, in both cases, upheld the drug testing at issue. TheSkinner andVon Raab decisions provided guidelines for analyzing Fourth Amendment challenges to employee drug testing, and the lower courts are now in the process of applying and refining these guidelines. Constitutional challenges to employee drug testing programs have also been based on the due process clause and the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and on the First Amendment's guarantee of freedom of religion. Unlike Fourth Amendment claims, however, these claims have rarely been successful.     

The Impact of Employee Share Ownership Plans On Employee Participation and Industrial Democracy

This article examines employee participation in recently-formed employee share ownership plan organisations (ESOPS) in the UK. the various legal/institutional forms of ESOP are outlined prior to considering the nature and determinants of participative institutions and processes. It is suggested that there are three ‘constellations’ of ESOP in terms of employee participation:‘technical ESOPS’, ‘paternalist ESOPs’ and ‘representative ESOPs’. There are relatively few innovations in participation in the first of these, while in paternalist ESOPs, innovations centre on individualistic forms of participation and communication at the level of the workplace. In representative ESOPs employees gain more of a say in strategic decisions through such innovations as employee representation on company boards. It is argued that these differences in the nature of participation are due neither to differences in legal structure nor to variations in the extent of employee share ownership. Instead, participative systems are viewed as the outcome of the philosophies and objectives of those involved in the conversion to employee ownership.     

The union response to employer-initiated drug testing programs

The testing of employees for drugs has become a major workplace issue in the late 1980s. By all accounts, many firms have implemented, or at least considered, some sort of drug screening program. While various experts have debated the importance and necessity of initiating such programs, there has been only limited investigation of the differences between union and nonunion workplaces in how such programs are initiated and administered. This article investigates some questions related to those differences. The first part examines the differences between union and nonunion workplaces and their implementation of drug screening programs. We present differences derived primarily from the fact that nonunion employers are constrained only by constitutional and statutory law in their introduction and implementation of drug screening programs. Unionized employers, on the other hand, are constrained by collective bargaining and the grievance resolution process. The second part of the article examines union responses to employer-initiated drug testing programs. The third part examines arbitration decisions on drug testing provisions in unionized workplaces. We outline the major areas in which arbitrators have rendered decisions, including definitions of behavior that could trigger reasonable suspicion testing and whether the employer has the right to unilaterally institute or expand drug testing programs.     

Drug testers versus nontesters: Human resources managers’ perceptions and organizational characteristics

Survey responses from 134 human resources managers (50 from drug testing and 84 from nontesting organizations) indicated that representatives from drug testing organizations were no less likely than their counterparts from nontesting organizations to know that drug tests cannot assess performance impairment. However, awareness of this limitation of drug testing was associated with greater perceptions of testing as invasive of privacy and unsound for dealing with drug use in the workplace. The prevalence of drug testing was related to organizational size and industry type, but unrelated to perceptions of employee’s drug use. Implications for research and practice are discussed.     

Legalistic organizational responses to catastrophic illness: The effect of stigmatization on reactions to HIV/AIDS

The HIV/AIDS epidemic has focused increased attention on catastrophic illnesses in the workplace, and because of the stigmas associated with HIV/AIDS, it raises three primary concerns for organizations: (1) organizational avoidance of legal sanctions and litigation; (2) the maintenance of organizational legitimacy; and (3) organizational protection of employee rights. Although many organizations adopt legalistic responses to cope with these concerns, the analysis presented in this article suggests that while legalistic approaches function well to protect organizational interests in terms of both legal liability and legitimacy, the are only partially able to protect employee rights. Drawing upon the limited literature on HIV/AIDS in the workplace, this article presents an agenda for future research on organizational responses to HIV/AIDS.     

Workplace Privacy: Employee Relations and Legal Implications of Monitoring Employee E-mail Use

The tradeoff between employees’ workplace privacy and employers’ need to protect company assets, safeguard proprietary information, and avoid costly litigation has been receiving increased attention (Lee and Kleiner 2003; Mello 2003; National Workplace Institute 2004). This tradeoff often favors employers, as the legal system provides much leeway for employers to monitor employees’ electronic communications in the workplace. However, employers need to consider the effect such monitoring has on their employees since employee and employer attitudes about monitoring often diverge. In this article, we explore workplace email monitoring from both employee relations and legal perspectives and discuss implications for employee morale. An earlier version of this research was presented at the 2005 Association on Employment Practices and Principles Conference, Baltimore, MD.     

An Affirmative Defense to Sexual Harassment by Managers and Supervisors: Analyzing Employer Liability and Protecting Employee Rights in the United States

Sexual harassment in the workplace is a serious worldwide employment problem. In the United States, courts have taken an increasingly expansive view of both employers' obligations and employees' rights in dealing with the issue. Landmark decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court addressing harassment by supervisors have sought to provide further guidance to employers in order to prevent harassment and refine their obligations. Yet despite the Court's efforts, harassment claims brought on by supervisor conduct continue to be a matter of great concern. This article offers a brief overview of U.S. sexual harassment law including its affirmative defense and provides a decision protocol for employers operating in the U.S. to follow in determining whether or not an affirmative defense can be confidently asserted. Finally management practices that respond to legal principles of an affirmative defense to prevent liability and protect employee rights are presented and discussed.     

Drug testing litigation: Trends and outcomes

This article chronicles the trend in private sector drug testing litigation from 1984 to 1994, details the legal theories that employees have used to challenge employer drug testing policies, and reports the success of these challenges. A search of the Westlaw data base uncovered 140 private sector drug testing cases disposed by the federal and state courts over this period. An analysis of these cases indicates that drug testing litigation accelerated rapidly in the late 1980s and then plateaued in the 1990s, that grounds for lawsuits are numerous, and that the percentage of cases won by employees is currently as high as it has ever been. Accordingly, in recognition of the nature and scope of the risk involved in employee drug screening, the prudent human resource manager should continue to exercise caution in drug testing policy design, implementation, and administration.     

An analysis of the drug testing decision

Two separate investigations were undertaken to better understand the factors that should be considered in the drug testing decision. In the first study, organizations were surveyed by telephone and were asked to identify the factors considered when making their decision. Safety seemed to be the most important reason for favoring a drug testing program, while employee rights was one of many reasons for not implementing a testing program. In the second study, the interest was in determining the impact of drug testing on the applicants' willingness to join the organization. It was found that salary was the most important factor, but that the drug testing policy did affect the job choice of about 20% of the students.     

The legal implications of workplace smoking policies

Smoking in the workplace has become a difficult and complex legal issue. Both smoking and nonsmoking employees have used various legal bases in their attempts to enforce their rights. An analysis of the reported legal decisions indicates that the trend is in favor of limiting the rights of smokers. As nonsmokers become more aggressive in their demands for a smoke-free environment, it will become increasingly important for employers to be well apprised of the legal implications associated with smoking in the workplace.     

Employee attitudes toward drug testing: Effects of individual characteristics and employment setting

Testing for the presence of drug continues to gain popularity as a method for controlling drug use in the workplace. It is important that employers understand how potential applicants and current employees will react to the various types and purposes of drug testing. Employees (n = 529) were interviewed to investigate the role of attitudes toward drugs and work setting characteristics in explaining acceptance or rejection of drug testing. Individuals believing users should be held responsible for becoming dependent on cocaine, who felt the primary cause of cocaine addiction was weak moral character, and those who felt cocaine users should be treated as criminals were more supportive of drug screening and the testing of current employees.     

The effect of job impact,job interdependence,and employee characteristics on the acceptability of a drug-testing policy

Increasingly employers are testing employees for illicit drug use. Employees vary in their degree of acceptance of drug-testing policies. Both job and individual characteristics are hypothesized to affect individuals’ reactions to drug-testing policies. The first study reported here investigated the effect of job impact, job interdependence, sex, and age on four aspects of the acceptability of a drug-testing policy. While there was no effect for the job characteristics, both age and sex had significant effects. A follow-up study which focused solely on employee characteristics replicated the age effect. Implications are discussed.     

A delicate balance protects everyone's rights

Clashes between employee and employer rights spill from the workplace out into the community at large. Drug testing, negligent hiring, sexual harassment and employment at will are issues that affect the individual, the company and the community at large.     

Impact mechanism of supervisor developmental feedback on employee workplace learning

Based on the mental simulation duality, this paper adopts the expected successful performance and self-goal setting as mediating variables and takes the dual system theory. This paper constructs a chain mediating model in which supervisor developmental feedback affects employee workplace learning. A study of 449 samples proves that supervisor developmental feedback can significantly improve employee workplace learning; expected successful performance and self-goal setting are significant independent mediating variables in the positive impact of supervisor developmental feedback on employee workplace learning; the supervisor developmental feedback promotes self-goal setting through expected successful performance and then positively affects employee workplace learning.     

On-duty and Off-duty: Employee Right to Privacy and Employer’s Right to Control in the Private Sector

The changing legal landscape of the right of the employer to control and monitor employee behavior is examined. Two distinct areas are defined: behavioral monitoring and behavioral restrictions. Relevant statutory laws and the developing common law are discussed. We also examine potential employee reactions to such policies by evaluating the reactions of graduate students to six employer policies including weight restrictions, grooming requirements, use of GPS locators, drug testing, ban on off-duty smoking, and email and internet monitoring. Students responded to these policies by determining the reasonable interest of the employer in the behaviors being monitored or controlled and the manner in which policies were implemented. Their comments suggest that employees may accept some level of monitoring or behavioral restrictions if the employer can make a convincing social account of the need for a policy. Additionally, the policy must be clearly communicated and properly implemented. However, restrictions on off-duty behavior were typically poorly received with the exception of illegal drug use.