|
Lab Tested for Drugs and
Alcohol. He was Positive for Both.
He was a good,
solid worker, always on the job -- until he suddenly backed his
truck over a 4-inch gas line. If the line had ruptured, there would
have been a serious explosion, according to the driver's employer.
The accident raised
a red flag, Greg DeLapp, senior employee relations specialist at
Carpenter Technology Corp. in Reading, Pa., told APBnews.com.
Under the company's
standard policy, the employee was tested for drugs and alcohol. He
was positive for both.
While there are
signs drug use by employees has declined substantially over the last
decade, the problem remains significant for Carpenter Technology and
other employers nationwide.
Workplace Policies
'Matter'
According to the
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMSHA),
the overall rate of current drug use by employees aged 18 to 49
dropped from 17.5 percent in 1985 to 7.7 percent in 1997.
"We see the largest
decreases in employees using drugs in companies that are testing on
a regular basis," said Barry Sample, director of forensic toxicology
at Quest Diagnostics. The Teterboro, N.J.-based company is a leading
contractor for workplace drug testing.
While it's unclear
what factors have contributed to the downward trend in employee drug
use, workplace policies "matter a great deal," said Dr. J. Westley
Clark, director of SAMSHA's Center for Drug Abuse Prevention.
Companies with
policies about detection and treatment, he said, are much less
likely to have a drug problem, and large companies are increasingly
adopting such procedures.
Still, SAMSHA's own
data suggest that nearly 73 percent of all illegal drug users in the
United States are employed -- 6.7 million are full-time workers, 1.6
million work part time.
Big Money Lost:
Employees who used
drugs were more likely to have worked for at least three companies,
left a job within the previous year and skipped a day or more of
work in the past week, the SAMSHA survey found. The most likely drug
users were young men who had not completed high school.
" Workers who use
drugs are more unstable, tend to call in sick more often and are
more inclined to have accidents," Clark said. It's difficult to pin
down how much employee drug use costs employers in lost
productivity, absenteeism, workers' compensation and other
expenditures, he said.
But consider these
figures gathered by large corporations:
IBM estimates that
it costs $50,000 to terminate an employee because of drug use.
General Motors
calculates that its employee drug-treatment program saves $37
million a year in lost productivity.
United Airlines
says it gets back $16.95 in higher productivity for every dollar
invested in employee drug-assistance programs.
Drug Testing a Hard
Sell:
Nonetheless, drug
detection and treatment programs can be a hard sell in this booming
economy, with employers finding it difficult to get all the workers
they need, Clark acknowledged.
"In a
low-unemployment market, management may be loath to point the finger
of suspicion at workers. All these issues cost money. But having
employees who are dysfunctional costs more money in the long run."
Significant
Decrease from 1988:
During the first
six months of 1999, 4.7 percent of drug tests performed by Quest
Diagnostics were positive, slightly down from 4.8 percent for all of
1998, according to the Drug Testing Index. This report summarizes
the results of some 2.8 million workplace drug tests performed
between January and June 1999 by the laboratory.
This represents a
significant decrease from 1988, when 13.6 percent of all drug tests
were reported as positive. The Drug Testing Index, which has been
issued twice a year since 1988, is considered a benchmark for
national trends by the federal government and other employers.
Comparing the first
half of 1999 with the previous year, among all positive results,
those positive for benzodiazapines were down (3 percent vs. 3.4
percent of all positives), as were those positive for cocaine (15.8
percent vs. 17.6 percent) and opiates (5.2 percent vs. 9.7 percent).
Lemonade, Mountain
Dew Used:
But the news isn't
all good. Comparing the first half of 1999 with the previous year,
among all those testing positive for drugs, amphetamines were up
(4.2 percent vs. 4.0 percent), along with barbiturates (3.6 vs. 3
percent) and marijuana (62.9 percent vs. 59.2 percent.
And more people
tried to beat the test, too. According to Quest's Drug Testing
Index, cheaters, who tested positive for substances used to
adulterate or dilute their urine specimens, accounted for 1.7
percent in the first half of 1999, as compared to 0.63 percent in
1998 overall.
In the first half
of 1999, says Quest Diagnostics, 2,400 job applicants tested
positive for adulterants to mask telltale signs of drug use in the
urine, and more than 1,200 others had substituted water or a
yellowish liquid for a valid test specimen.
"I've even heard
that lemonade and Mountain Dew have been submitted as samples,"
Sample said. He adds that labs have identified -- and countered --
just about all of the cheats.
Testers Thwarting
Cheaters:
One trick is to
drink lots of water to dilute the concentration of drug-related
substances in the urine. Testers thwart that tactic by measuring the
amount of creatinine in urine; if levels of this normal byproduct of
metabolic activity are too low, they know the employee is trying to
deliberately confound the results of the test.
Numerous Web sites
-- with such unsubtle names as PassYourDrugTest.com and
BeatYourDrugTest.com -- sell products to help people beat drug
tests.
"I've seen a
document on one of these Web sites, How To Piss and Pass," said
Sample, who found it to be "one of the more creative marketing
efforts."
Some adulterants
are powders or teas that are mixed into water, said Sample. "You
then have to drink more water two to four hours before your drug
test. All you're doing is diluting your urine, and we can pick that
up."
Other concoctions
are oxidizing agents, such as nitrites, which change the chemical
composition of the marijuana metabolite in urine so that the test
won't pick up its presence. These take from four to 24 hours to work
based on the amount of adulterant used, the concentration of
marijuana metabolite in the urine and other factors, Sample said.
The problem is
oxidants work "too well," he said. In the first round of screening
-- which separates negative tests from those needing a closer look
-- the compound hasn't had enough time to work, so the sample will
test positive for marijuana and will be subjected to a second
confirmatory round of testing. But by this time, he explains, "we
are no longer able to then detect the marijuana metabolite in the
urine" -- and the discrepancy between the two results is a tip-off.
" There is a very
low chance that the donor will get a negative drug test," Sample
said.
A Helping Hand:
There are some
classic warning signs of drug use, Clark said. Sometimes, they may
be as obvious as a worker weaving unsteadily on the way to the job.
"Very often drug
and alcohol problems do not come forward directly," DeLapp said. "It
may be an accident, a call from a spouse, a call from a credit union
or a supervisor, a call from a peer in the labor group who
recognizes that a co-worker is no longer safe."
In addition to his
duties at Carpenter, DeLapp is president of the Employee Assistance
Professionals Association (EAPA). The organization, based in
Arlington, Va., has 7,000 members who steer workers to treatment
programs once a problem is detected. Drug and alcohol abuse are
"part of the core problems addressed by EAPA," he said.
Tests Should Be
High Quality:
His association has
no formal position on pre-emptive drug testing, "but my personal
opinion is that it is an avenue that employers should pursue,"
DeLapp said.
But with one major
condition: "Only the best technology should be used, for [the]
protection of the employer and employee. Cheap buck-fifty testing
will get both you and the worker in trouble, [because of] a high
error rate."
" Drug testing
alone is not sufficient," Clark said. "What you need to have for
people with a problem is treatment."
"Well-publicized
policies and a genuine offer of assistance when there is an alcohol
or drug problem" make such a program work, said DeLapp.
Recovery Helped
Through Counseling:
"Workers with a
problem will try to survive on denial and manipulation," DeLapp
cautioned. Once the problem is detected, it is "very difficult" to
treat.
A substance-abuse
problem often requires outpatient counseling and treatment, said
DeLapp, and counseling will continue for as long as necessary.
"Health insurance should pay for treatment, so that the employee can
be encouraged to get treatment early rather than late," Clark added.
The problem is
"very treatable," said DeLapp, "if the employee has the support of
the employer, the union and the family, and has the health coverage
available for the kind of treatment that is necessary. The employee
with that kind of support will do well."
For instance, take
the case of DeLapp's colleague at Carpenter Technology who was
abusing both drugs and alcohol: "He was sent to outpatient
counseling and treatment. He did well over the next 12 or 13 months,
had a temporary relapse, and since then has had eight years of solid
recovery," said DeLapp.
Ed Edelson is an
APBnews.com correspondent in New York.
New York
(APBnews.com)
Return to Passing Drug Test
News Menu
Passing Drug Tests With Ready Clean - XXtra Clean - Root
Clean
|
