Reasonable Suspicion a. Reasonable suspicion to test a Covered Employees for illegal drugs or alcohol will exist when specific, reliable objective facts and circumstances would create a good faith belief in a prudent person that the employee has used a drug or alcohol. Such circumstances include, but are not limited to, the employee’s behavior or appearance while on any SFMTA jobsite, while on SFMTA business or in SFMTA facilities, and recognized and accepted symptoms of intoxication or impairment caused by drugs or alcohol, that are not reasonably explained by other causes such as fatigue, lack of sleep, proper use of prescription drugs, or reaction to noxious fumes or smoke.
b. Any individual or employee can report an employee who may be under the influence of alcohol or drugs. Upon receiving a report of possible alcohol or illegal drugs on the job, two (2) trained employer representatives will verify and document the basis for the suspicion and request testing. The first employer representative shall verify and document the employee’s appearance and behavior based on the above-stated indicators and, if appropriate, recommend testing to the second employer representative. At work locations within the border of the City and County of San Francisco (including San Francisco International Airport), the second employer representative shall verify and document the appearance and behavior of the employee based on the above-stated indicators and has final authority to require the employee to be tested. At work locations outside the border of the City and County of San Francisco, the second employer representative shall confer with the first employer representative to verify the employee’s behavior based on the above-stated indicators, and the second employer representative has the final authority to require the employee to be tested. In the event only one trained employer representative is available onsite, the representative shall confer with any other trained employer representative within the City to verify the employee’s behavior. The second trained employer representative shall have the final authority to require the employee to be tested.
c. If the SFMTA requires an employee to be tested under reasonable suspicion, then the employee may ask for representation. Representation may include, but is not limited to, union representatives and shop stewards. If the employee requests representation, the SFMTA may allow a reasonable amount (a maximum of one hour) of time for the employe...
Reasonable Suspicion. Only reasonable suspicion testing shall occur; when it occurs it will be subject to the terms of this agreement. Reasonable suspicion must be based on specific, contemporaneous, articulable observations at work concerning the appearance, behavior, speech or body odor that the employee may be at work with detectable levels of alcohol (.04 or above), illegal or unauthorized drugs.
Reasonable Suspicion. That quantity of proof or evidence that is more than a hunch, but less than probable cause. Reasonable suspicion must be based on specific, objective facts and any rationally derived inferences from those facts about the conduct of an employee. These facts or inferences would lead the reasonable person to suspect that the employee is or has been using drugs while on or off duty.
Reasonable Suspicion. Where the City has reasonable suspicion to believe that: (a) an employee is being affected by the use of alcohol, or consuming or possessing alcohol in violation of this Article; or (b) is misusing prescription drugs; or (c) is possessing or using illegal drugs, or
Reasonable Suspicion. Employees covered by this Agreement may be required to submit a urine specimen for testing for the presence of drugs or a breath sample for the testing of the presence of alcohol: Where there is reasonable suspicion to believe that the employee, when appearing for duty or on the job, is under the influence of, or his/her job performance, is impaired by alcohol or other drugs. Such reasonable suspicion must be based upon objective facts or specific circumstances found to exist that present a reasonable basis to believe that an employee is under the influence of, or is using or abusing, alcohol or drugs. Examples of reasonable suspicion shall include, but are not limited to, slurred speech, disorientation, abnormal conduct or behavior, or involvement in an on-the-job accident resulting in disabling personal injury requiring immediate hospitalization of any person or property damage in excess of $2,000, where the circumstances raise a reasonable suspicion concerning the existence of alcohol or other drug use or abuse by the employee. In addition, such reasonable suspicion must be documented in writing and supported by two witnesses, including the person having such suspicion. The immediate supervisor shall be contacted to confirm a test is warranted based upon the circumstances. Such written documentation must be presented, as soon as possible, to the employee and the department head, who shall maintain such report in the strictest confidence, except that a copy shall be released to any person designated by the affected employee.
Reasonable Suspicion. Where the City has reasonable suspicion to believe that: (a) a member is being affected by the use of alcohol, or consuming or possessing alcohol in violation of this Article (i.e., not in the line of duty); or (b) is abusing prescription drugs; or (c) is possessing (not in the line of duty) or using illegal drugs, the City shall have the right to require the member to submit to alcohol and drug testing as set forth in this Article. Members shall not be subjected to random medical testing involving blood or urine analysis or other similar or related tests for the purpose of discovering possible drug or alcohol abuse, except as specifically provided for in this Article 17.
Reasonable Suspicion. An apparent state of facts and/or circumstances found to exist upon inquiry by the supervisor, which would induce a reasonably intelligent prudent person to suspect the employee was under the influence of drugs/narcotics.
Reasonable Suspicion. When the City has reason to believe an employee is: 1) under the influence of alcohol or medical marijuana, or consuming or possessing alcohol or medical marijuana in violation of this Article; or 2) is possessing, using or under the influence of illegal drugs; or 3) is misusing and/or abusing prescription drugs, the City shall require the employee to submit to drug and alcohol testing. The City shall hold harmless any employee or supervisor, who, in good faith and with just cause, recommends that an employee be tested for drugs and/or alcohol.
Reasonable Suspicion. Reasonable suspicion" is a belief based on objective facts sufficient to lead a reasonable person to suspect that an employee is under the influence of drugs or alcohol so that the employee's ability to perform the functions of the job is impaired or that the employee's ability to perform his/her job safely is reduced. For example, any of the following, alone or in combination, may constitute reasonable suspicion:
Reasonable Suspicion. Reasonable suspicion must be based on specific, contemporaneous, articulable observations concerning the appearance, behavior, speech, or body odors of the employee. The observations may include indications of chronic and/or withdrawal effects of alcohol/drugs. The supervisor shall record, in writing, his observations which created a reasonable suspicion. The supervisor shall immediately seek a second supervisor to confirm such suspicion. The second supervisor shall also record, in writing, his observations which confirm reasonable suspicion.
