Work‐place alcohol and other drug testing: a review of the scientific evidence

Abstract

In this paper, scientific evidence for alcohol and other drug testing programs is compared to determine whether each approach is justifiable for improving work-place safety. Three types of studies are reviewed: laboratory, epidemiological and evaluation studies. Laboratory studies show that alcohol use decreases psycho-motor performance; however, for other drugs, some drugs deteriorate performance while others have little effect. Epidemiological studies in the work-place have not provided conclusive evidence that a strong causal link exists between either alcohol or other drug use and work-place injuries/accidents. Evaluation studies have not shown that either drug or alcohol testing significantly reduces work injuries/accidents. Other types of scientific evidence provide some justification of alcohol testing, but not for other drug testing. Alcohol use is much more common than other drug use in industrialized countries, suggesting that alcohol may be more related to industrial accidents than other drugs. As well, epidemiological studies suggest that alcohol is a major factor for traffic collisions, but research is inconclusive for other drugs. Finally, alcohol testing is more justifiable than drug testing because the results of alcohol tests closely correlate with psycho-motor performance while drug tests do not.

Relation of Supervisor Social Control to Employee Substance Use: Considering the Dimensionality of Social Control, Temporal Context of Substance Use, and Substance Legality

“…In fact, there may be no better way of obtaining such data, especially when assessing the context of substance use. Substance use behaviors are often hidden from potential collateral informants (Baldwin, 2000;Turkkan, 2000), collateral reports are subject to similar sources of error (Connors and Maisto, 2003;Del Boca and Darkes, 2003), and biologic tests (e.g., urine, hair, blood, saliva) cannot provide information regarding the context (on-the-job vs. off-the-job) in which substances were used (Frone, 2004;Macdonald et al, 1997;Normand et al, 1994).…”

“…Third, and related to President Reagan's executive order, many companies test employees for illicit drugs but not for alcohol use. Because such drug tests cannot determine the time of use, they primarily detect use that has occurred off the job (Frone, 2004;Macdonald et al, 1997;Normand et al, 1994). This means that off-the-job use of illicit drugs identifi ed in pre-employment drug testing programs is used to deny employment to job applicants, and off-the-job use identifi ed in random drug testing programs might lead to sanctions or termination of employment among current employees.…”

Variations of alcohol impairment in different types, causes and contexts of injuries: Results of emergency room studies from 16 countries

“…Two reviews of the literature indicate that alcohol does not play a substantial causal role in work injuries (Stallones and Kraus, 1993;Webb et al, 1994). Alcohol may not play an important role in work accidents because few people actually drink on the job in Ontario (Macdonald, 1997).…”

Changes in the Prevalence and Characteristics of Ontario Workplace Health Programs

“…In a well-publicized case of Entrop versus Imperial Oil Ltd, both pre-employment and random drug testing were determined to be in violation of human rights laws because they cannot assess actual or future impairment on the job. Further strengthening this argument is that urine tests actually detect prior use rather than current impairment (Macdonald, 1997). Also, existing studies have certain methodological limitations and have not convincingly demonstrated that drug testing significantly reduces job accidents (Macdonald, 1997;Kraus, 2001).…”

“…Governmental reasoning for promoting DTPs was influenced by political policies of the war on drugs, with all efforts aimed at eliminating drug use. However, in other countries, such as Canada, the only accepted reason for testing was the reduction in the likelihood of industrial accidents (Macdonald, 1997). DTPs follow the same objectives as those in the criminal justice system-enforcement, punishment, and deterrence.…”