Skip to main content
Close
A-Z
Quick Links

Drug and Alcohol Free Workplace Policy

This policy was posted for public comment from January 22 – February 6, 2024.

Comments

I have a couple of issues with the new policy changes. 1) regarding medical cannabis, while I understand the ban on use/possession on campus, how will the administration handle a situation where someone tests positive when being tested for another reason such as is required in certain positions? 2) I oppose the requirement for an employee to be required to disclose charges without a conviction. Research shows that certain races are disproportionally charged and pulled over by police. The courts should determine guilt before SLCC takes any action, since that could unjustly harm the employee and open the college to lawsuits.

Section 4.A. 3 a says: "3. Test Results and Employee Notification

a. After pre-employment testing is complete and the college has received the test results, People and Workplace Culture (PWC) will notify the employee’s supervisor of the test results. For positive test results, the Employee Relations director will consult the hiring manager to determine the appropriate course of action." Please change Employee Relations Director to PWC Senior Director, or delegate.

I am concerned about the discriminatory inferences that will occur if Section D requires employees who have been charged with--but not convicted of--a drug or alcohol-related crime to report those charges. I was an attorney for seven years, and I know false and/or mistaken charges happen in our criminal justice system. Employees should not have to disclose charges that may not lead to a conviction. If they are required to disclose the charges, people will assume that a charged employee (especially someone who is usually subject to discrimination due to their race or class) is guilty of the crime that they are charged with, even though the law demands that individuals be assumed innocent until they are convicted.

I don't see anything regarding tobacco use and/or cessation resources. Could that be in some other policy?

1. Policy
1. Delete the words “a safe” from the policy statement.
2. The policy in “clunky”. It really does not tell you who it applies to have the college. This is a CDL policy that it looks like they have tried to expand to deal with everyone at the college.
3. In the policy statement, language should be added that is in Section 4.H which states “The college encourages employees to utilize the health support available through various college and community resources.” This policy should convey the message that the College will try to work with an employee who has an alcohol or substance abuse problem and will just provide help to employees who self-disclose their substance abuse problem.

4. Procedures
A. General Testing Information
1. The policy that has been developed seems like it is implementing the rigor that is applied to the CDL program across all departments. The procedure should be specific to particular classes of employees and should not be a “one size fits all” approach.
2. In section 4.A.3.a. – this appears that all employees of the college must undergo a preemployment drug screen. Please provide some clarification on who this is directly impacting.
3. In section 4.A.5.b, it is states that “the college must treat a refusal as a positive test according to the particular law.” This is only a requirement for a CDL operator and not other positions.


B. Types of Testing
1. 4.B.2 – general comment – are they stating that any employee that has been involved in an auto accident while working is required to submit to a drug screening? What happens if the employee has not received driver training, but is still driving from one campus to another for a meeting/event, etc.
2. 4.B.2.b. – there are employees of the college who have not received driver training. Only employees who receive the driver training would know that they are required to report any accident. However, the training does not state that they are required to notify Fleet, only that they are required to notify the institution.
3. 4.B.2.b(2) – what happens if the accident occurs after normal business hours, if Risk Management or Fleet does not respond to a call notifying them of an incident?
4. In section 4.B.3.c, it states that “college supervisors with position that engage in reasonable suspicion testing must undergo college-approved related training at least annually.” Who are these college supervisors? This needs to be clarified.
5. In section 4.B.3.d, it references “reasonable suspicion testing training”. What are the components or contents of this training? These components or subject matter areas should be listed in the policy. (i.e., slurred speech, poor balance, bloodshot eyes, etc.) This information could be taken out of the training video.
6. In section 4.B.3.e, it states the supervisors must consult with Employee Relations and the EHS Manager to arrange for reasonable suspicion testing. Are Employee Relations and EHS staff trained in Reasonable Suspicion testing?
7. G.f – what if that position is a faculty position in health care? Will they be allowed to maintain a faculty position if they are no longer able to receive their professional licensure (DOPL) due to substance issues?
8. 4.G.1. – they are specifically targeting those with CDL, but should they be referring to individuals that drive fleet vehicles? CDL would only be a maybe 10 personnel at the college?


C. Medical Cannabis
1. There have been lower-level court cases which have determined that a college’s policy allowing the medical use of marijuana as required by state law, does not disqualify the college or state government entity from obtaining grant funding or losing it. It is a good faith test.


D. Duty to Report Alcohol and Drug Law Charges and Convictions
1. In this section, make sure that this language is consistent with similar provisions in the Employee Conduct Policy and recently suggested provisions in the Employment Background Check Policy.


E. College-Identified Substance Abuse Assistance or Rehabilitation Program
1. In section 4.E.1. what type of alcohol or drug assessment will be conducted? This should be clarified. Who will pay for that assessment?
2. In both sections 4.E.2.a and 4.E.1.a, consider changing the word “may” to “will” when it comes to participating in a substance abuse program.
3. In section 4.E.2 regarding participation in a Substance Abuse Program, who will pay for this program? Would the outcome be different if it were an employee’s 1st DUI as opposed to a 2nd or 3rd DUI?

Responses

I don't see anything regarding tobacco use and/or cessation resources. Could that be in some other policy?

Tobacco use/or cessation would fall under substance abuse. Vaping would be included as well.

Policy Statement (section 1)

Suggestion to delete the words “a safe” from the policy statement.

The word “safe” has been removed from the first sentence of the policy statement.

Suggest revisions to clarify who this policy applies to at the college. Does it apply to CDL or everyone at the college?

No revisions were made based on this comment. The policy applies to all college employees, as stated in the second sentence of the policy statement. There are areas of the college that require drug screening that are not related to CDL (see definition for Safety-Sensitive Position (3.C)).

Suggestion to add the language from 4.H to the policy statement. This policy should convey the message that the College will try to work with an employee who has an alcohol or substance abuse problem and will just provide help to employees who self-disclose their substance abuse problem.

The policy statement has been revised to include the following sentence, “The college encourages employees with substance abuse issues to utilize the health support available through various college and community resources.” This is a revision of the language in 4.H.

General Testing Information (4.A)

Concern that this policy should not implement the rigor applied to the CDL program across all departments. Suggestion that “the procedure should be specific to particular classes of employees and not a “one size fits all” approach.”

This policy applies to all college employees.

Please change Employee Relations Director to PWC Senior Director, or delegate (4.A.3).

Revision accepted.

Section 4.A.3.a lacks clarity and implies that all employees must undergo a pre-employment drug screen.

4.A.3 has been revised to read, “If pre-employment testing is required for a prospective employee, after the testing is completed and the college has received the test results, People and Workplace Culture (“PWC”) will notify the hiring manager of the test results. For positive test results, the senior director of PWC will consult the hiring manager to determine the appropriate course of action.” 4.B.1 provides additional clarification.

Section 4.A.5.b states, “the college must treat a refusal as a positive test according to the particular law.” This is only a requirement for a CDL operator and not for other positions.

4.A.5.b has been revised to state, “The college will treat a refusal as a positive test.” Definitions have also been added (section 3) for “test results,” “positive results,” and “negative results” for clarification.

Types of Testing (4.B)

Is the policy stating that any employee who has been involved in an auto accident while working is required to submit to a drug screening? What happens if the employee has not received driver training but is still driving from one campus to another for a meeting/event, etc. (4.B.2)

4.B.2.a has been revised to state that post-accident testing applies to “employees involved in an accident while on college business…” 4.B.2.c states, “Risk Management will arrange post-accident testing as necessary.” Although a vehicular accident that occurs while an employee is working should be reported, it does not necessarily automatically involve post-accident testing. Post-accident testing will be determined on a case-by-case basis.

Only employees who receive driver training would know that they are required to report any accident. (4.B.2.b)

Employees should be following college policies. Also, employees driving Fleet vehicles are informed of this requirement, and appropriate contact information is located in each Fleet vehicle. Although it is outside the purview of this committee, suggestions for improving communication around responsibility for employees involved in vehicular accidents while on college business will be forwarded to the appropriate departments.

What happens if the accident occurs after normal business hours or Risk Management or Fleet does not respond to a call notifying them of an incident? (4.B.2.b(2))

If an employee is driving on college business (4.B.2.b) and neither Risk Management nor Fleet is available, the employee should leave a message (email preferred, voicemail also acceptable).

Who are the “college supervisors with positions that engage in reasonable suspicion testing must undergo college-approved related training at least annually.”(4.B.3.c)?

This refers to individuals supervising safety-sensitive positions (defined in 3.C). These supervisors change regularly. Our drug-testing companies provide reasonable suspicion testing. PWC and Risk Management go through the college-approved reasonable suspicion testing and can connect supervisors with the training.

What are the components or contents of “reasonable suspicion testing training” (4.B.3.d)? These components or subject matter areas should be listed in the policy. (i.e., slurred speech, poor balance, bloodshot eyes, etc.)

No revisions were made in response to this comment. The college has had issues with supervisors who have not gone through college-approved reasonable suspicion testing training, reading a list of possible factors, and acting upon that list. Whoever initiates reasonable suspicion testing needs to be appropriately trained.

Section 4.B.3.e states the supervisors must consult with Employee Relations and the EHS Manager to arrange for reasonable suspicion testing. Are Employee Relations and EHS staff trained in Reasonable Suspicion testing?

Supervisors first work with Employee Relations to determine if reasonable suspicion testing is appropriate. Employee Relations will consult with legal as needed before reasonable suspicion testing is initiated. The EHS manager position is also trained in reasonable suspicion testing and will arrange transportation if testing is determined to be appropriate. Employee Relations positions that have not yet had reasonable suspicion training shall undergo training.

What if that position is a faculty position in health care? Will they be allowed to maintain a faculty position if they are no longer able to receive their professional licensure (DOPL) due to substance issues? (4.B.3.f)

A new 4.B.3.g section now states, “An employee who tests positive may be subject to corrective action, up to and including termination.”

Is this policy specifically targeting those with CDL, but should it refer to individuals driving fleet vehicles? (4.B.3.g.(1))

No revisions were made based on this comment. 4.B.3.a states, “all college employees are subject to reasonable suspicion testing.” 4.B.3.h(1) is not specific to individuals who are driving. The decision to test for reasonable suspicion is “based on specific, documentable, contemporaneous observations outlined in the reasonable suspicion testing training.” (4.B.3.d)

Medical Cannabis (4.C)

How will the administration handle a situation where someone tests positive when being tested for another reason, such as is required in certain positions?

Under HIPAA, the laboratory conducting the drug test can only report the results of the test ordered to the college. So, if an employee was tested for alcohol and they were negative, but their sample also tested positive for a different substance, the lab would only report to the college that the test was negative for alcohol.

There have been lower-level court cases that have determined that a college’s policy allowing the medical use of marijuana, as required by state law, does not disqualify the college or state government entity from obtaining grant funding or losing it. It is a good faith test.

Legal Counsel for the college has reviewed this. No revisions were made.

Concerns about the language used in 4.D. around the duty to report alcohol and drug law charges and convictions.

Revised to read, “Existing employees and volunteers must report criminal convictions, arrests, or criminal charges in any form initiated by any governmental authority. This report must be provided to their Supervisor and Employee Relations within five business days, consistent with the SLCC Employee Conduct Policy.”

College-Identified Substance Abuse Assistance or Rehabilitation Program (4.E)

What type of alcohol or drug assessment will be conducted? Who will pay for that assessment? (4.E.1)

The assessment depends on what is recommended by the health professional. In many cases, insurance may pay for the assessment. If the insurance does not cover the cost, then the department or employee may pay for the assessment.

In sections 4.E.2.a and 4.E.1.a, consider changing the word “may” to “will” when discussing participating in a substance abuse program.

No changes were made in response to this comment.

Regarding participation in a Substance Abuse Program (4.E.2), who will pay for this program? Would the outcome be different if it were an employee’s 1st DUI as opposed to a 2nd or 3rd DUI?

In many cases, insurance may pay for the assessment. If the insurance does not cover the cost, then the department or employee may pay for the assessment. Each situation will be dealt with on a case-by-case basis involving the supervisor and Employee Relations.