|
|
|
 |
If you find managing drug and alcohol risk in
the workplace confusing, you're in good company!
Companies both large and small approach us on a
regular basis seeking to find a solution to this
issue; often finding the range of different
perspectives, testing methods and conflicting
information can stifle efforts to address this
important issue. The following are a short list of
questions that we are frequently asked to address.
|
|
|
On-site drug
testing can be performed with a high degree of
accuracy and has become an accepted method of
screening samples quickly, prior to sending any
samples returning abnormal results to an approved
laboratory for "confirmation testing".
However it is
important to note that the testing devices used
should be considered screening kits only. This means
that samples that present a positive drug screening
result should be referred to an approved laboratory
for confirmation testing. A valid type of secondary
testing should also be conducted for abnormal
alcohol readings, however in workplace environments,
abnormal alcohol testing normally involves repeating
the test on a properly calibrated high quality fuel
cell based alcohol testing unit.
On-site drug
testing kits are immunoassays using the same
principles as found in screening tests in
laboratories. Occasionally it is possible for any
immunoassay whether on-site or in a laboratory to
cross-react with another substance (including other
pharmaceutical drugs) that are very closely related
to the structure of the "target substance"
(producing a false positive), or to detect a drug
that is very close to the cut-off level as a
"positive" result when in fact it is actually
slightly under the cut-off level. The latter
circumstance is a “false positive” in name only as
there was drug present however it didn’t reach the
confirmatory cut-off.
It is also
possible that on-site kits can produce a positive
result on-site, however the initial screening
immunoassay test in the laboratory can return a
negative result. However this ONLY occurs when the
level of drug in the sample is very close to the
cut-off level used to evaluate the sample (which is
not common at all).
For the vast
majority of samples - in over 98% of samples that
are tested this does not occur simply due to the
fact that the levels are dramatically higher or
lower than the benchmark cut-off levels. Perhaps
what is more relevant is the fact that should the
on-site test produce a positive the probability of
drug being present irrespective of reaching the
cut-off level during the confirmatory process is
extremely high.
|
|
|
We believe that
the only way to modify behaviour is to have some
sort of penalty (or consequence) for those people
who choose not to comply with a testing program
following an education program.
The Australian
drink driving situation is probably a model example
of this idea.
Why?
We all know that
if we drive on the roads after drinking - there is a
very real chance that we could;
1) lose our licence
2) lose our job 3) kill someone else and/ or 4) kill
ourselves.
This is a
combination of consequences if we are caught and
education by government (through various TV, radio
and billboard advertising media) teaching us the
dangers that we face if we drink and drive. These
two aspects combined; consequences and education
have altered our behaviour and have subsequently
made our roads a safer place for our families.
This same
philosophy needs to be introduced in a drug &
alcohol program in our workplaces. There needs to be
a consequence for breaching the policy (to encourage
a change in behaviour) and education (to inform us
and our work mates about the dangers of drugs and
alcohol in the workplace and to teach us ways in
which we can change our behaviour). Using just one
of these approaches on their own would most likely
have negligible impact; in the same way that if
there were no consequences for drink driving - just
simply education about the dangers - we would
probably still be hearing about drink driving
fatalities on a regular basis just like we did many
years ago.
So how does this translate in our experience?
Our normal
starting point in most drug and alcohol testing
programs is that we expect to find between 10% and
15% of positive results at the commencement of a
program. In some instances this can be higher and in
very rare cases it can be lower. Organisations who
think that they have "no problem" are often
mortified when they realise the extent of recent
drug & alcohol use by their workforce.
After commencing
a testing and educational program we expect to
reduce this positive rate to 2-3%. Many of our
clients now even achieve 0% positive rate or very
close to 0% (sometimes in cases when they commenced
with an initial benchmark as high as 20%). This
indicates the effectiveness of a program and direct
feedback to our staff normally includes comments
that they "feel safer", "wish it had been introduced
years ago", "feel healthier", "have saved their
marriage", "now have more money for their family".
Additionally, some people have modified their
consumption; they might still consume the drugs
and/or alcohol, however they do so in a way that has
little chance of presenting a positive test results
- and of course this improves the safety conditions
for their work-mates and themselves. Modified
consumption like this still achieves the ultimate
objective of improving the safety of the workplace.
|
|
|
A policy is an
extremely important aspect of any workplace Drug and
Alcohol Program. This is because the policy;
-
explains the
testing process to all staff
-
demonstrates
the companies commitment to workplace safety, in
particular dealing with drugs and alcohol
-
explains how
various situations should be dealt with such as
refusal to test, dealing with medications and
first, second and third instances of discovering a
positive result.
-
may be relied
upon by Courts or Industrial Commissions
|
|
|
Policy
introduction is almost as important as the policy
itself. Often companies benefit from having close
interaction with staff throughout the policy
development process.
This normally
greatly assists program acceptance and improves the
"ownership" of the policy.
Some of the tools
that can be utilised to facilitate a smooth
implementation program includes:
-
invite industry
experts to talk with staff and to explain the
testing process and the health and safety effects
of drug use
-
highlight the
personal advantages that will be achieved from the
testing program
-
employee
assistance programs are strongly advised in any
testing program
-
ensure that
anyone with "issues" regarding the proposed
program is given an opportunity to discuss them
-
have a feedback
process - keep all staff informed about the
process as early as possible and well before any
testing is actually carried out
|
