That figure may seem like chump change, but administration manager Renee Haggard-Woodard says financial savings from participating in Tennessee’s drug-free workplace program were the least important benefit of implementing the program. “Even if you break even, you still have created a positive atmosphere and gained employee confidence in the company,” Haggard-Woodard says, adding that attendance and productivity increased as well.

In April 2003, the warehousing and inventory storage company started its drug-free workplace program, implementing drug screenings that run the gamut, including pre-employment, reasonable suspicion, random, post-accident and federally mandated transportation-related tests for its truck drivers. And there’s no discrimination—the president of IWS was tested two times in quarterly sweeps last year.

According to the Tennessee Depart- ment of Labor & Workforce Development, very few small businesses have drug-free workplace programs, which can make these companies targets for workers who want to use drugs. Add to that concern some sobering statistics—nearly 70% of users of illegal drugs are employed, and a third of employees know of the illegal sale of drugs in their workplaces—and most small business owners should take notice.

Johnny Stites, chief executive of J&S Construction Co. in Cookeville, Tenn., says the company’s drug-testing program cuts down on the practice of drug-free employees having to pick up the slack for drug-using ones who fail to show for work or are not working effectively . “The good people are looking for a company where they can work with other good people,” Stites says, adding that he was surprised at the explosion of interest from job candidates after the company became a drug-free workplace.

For businesses considering a drug-testing program, it’s very important to communicate the details of the program to employees, says Nashville attorney Howard Kastrinsky, who heads King & Ballow’s employment and discrimination section. Kastrinsky advises employers to make sure workers understand how drug testing is done and why such a program is in place. Managers should explain that the testing is being done to protect everyone’s safety. If testing occurs on the front-end, job applicants can learn about a company’s drug-testing policy on applications, Kastrinsky says, adding that when it comes to testing current employees, employers must include the policy in employee handbooks and require employees to sign-off, saying they’ve received the policy.

The costs of implementing drug testing are not as significant as might be expected. On average, specimen screenings run about $40 each. While employee turnover or staff growth can increase the costs for drug screenings, the state’s drug-free workplace program offers employers financial savings, such as the one Tullahoma’s IWS took advantage of with its new program. Tennessee offers participating employers a 5% premium credit on workers’ compensation insurance, along with other workers’ compensation protections.

One consideration for a drug-testing program is the possibility of legal challenges. According to the state, the courts favor testing based on clear, fair and consistent procedures that are communicated in a written policy statement. It’s also worth noting that employment decisions based on a substance abuse test result can be contested.

John Phillips, a partner in law firm Miller & Martin in Chattanooga, says invasion of privacy is the legal theory most often used in lawsuits that derive from drug testing. “If an employer has a drug-testing program set up right, employees usually don’t get far in making a claim under that theory.” The most common and safest drug testing involves testing new hires, Phillips says, because once an employee signs an application agreeing to drug testing, he really has given up any invasion of privacy claim.

After an employer has the information established in the relevant company literature, it’s time to find a lab to do the testing. To this end, employers can work with the state to find certified labs, and the state offers information kits to employers interested in the program. “Drug testing has been around long enough that most labs that do drug testing for employers know what they’re doing,” Phillips says. Still, he advises companies to make sure a chosen lab performs confirmation tests to reduce false positives and documents “chain of custody” by having each person handling the specimen sign off.

Confidentiality is also a concern for small businesses, perhaps more so than larger organizations, because smaller businesses often operate more like a family, says David Black, president and CEO of Aegis Sciences Corp., a drug-testing firm in Nashville. Test results should not be shared with anyone except the employee, and “everybody must be tested and treated equally,” Black says.

Drug testing may not seem like a top priority to companies that do not use dangerous equipment or machinery, and for every employer, the implementation of a new program elicits cost concerns. Nonetheless, many of those employers who have started drug-testing programs have found these policies and procedures can not only save money but also provide unexpected benefits beyond increased safety in the workplace.

Back to issue home page

Email to a Friend Print-Friendly Format