Reasonable Suspicion Testing. All Employees Performing Safety-Sensitive Functions
A. Reasonable suspicion testing for alcohol or controlled substances may be directed by the Employer for any employee performing safety-sensitive functions when there is reason to suspect that alcohol or controlled substance use may be adversely affecting the employee’s job performance or that the employee may present a danger to the physical safety of the employee or another.
B. Specific objective grounds must be stated in writing that support the reasonable suspicion. Examples of specific objective grounds include but are not limited to:
1. Physical symptoms consistent with alcohol and/or controlled substance use;
2. Evidence or observation of alcohol or controlled substance use, possession, sale, or delivery; or
3. The occurrence of an accident(s) where a trained manager, supervisor or lead worker suspects alcohol or other controlled substance use may have been a factor.
Reasonable Suspicion Testing a. Reasonable suspicion to test a Covered Employee will exist when contemporaneous, articulable and specific observations concerning the symptoms or manifestations of impairment can be made. These observations shall be documented on the Reasonable Suspicion Report Form attached to this Appendix as Exhibit B. At least three (3) indicia of drug or alcohol impairment must exist, in two (2) separate categories, as listed on the Reasonable Suspicion Report Form. In the alternative, the employer representatives must confirm direct evidence of drug or alcohol impairment as listed on the Reasonable Suspicion Report Form.
b. Any individual or employee may report another employee who may appear to that individual or employee to be under the influence of alcohol or drugs. Upon receiving a report of possible alcohol or drug use or impairment in the workplace, two (2) trained supervisory employer representatives will independently verify the basis for the suspicion and request testing in person. The first employer representative shall verify and document the employee’s appearance and behavior and, if appropriate, recommend testing to the second employer representative. The second employer representative shall verify the contemporaneous basis for the suspicion. If reasonable suspicion to test a Covered Employee arises between 11:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m., or at a location outside the geographic boundaries of the City and County of San Francisco (excluding San Francisco International Airport), and where a second trained supervisory employer representative cannot reasonably get to the location within thirty (30) minutes, then the second employer representative shall not be required to verify the basis for the suspicion in person, but instead shall verify by telephone or email. After completing the verification, and consulting with the first employer representative, the second employer representative has final authority to require that the Covered Employee be tested.
c. If the City requires an employee under reasonable suspicion to be tested, 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 City shall allow a reasonable amount of time from the time the employee is notified that the employee will be tested (up to a maximum of one hour) for the employee to obtain representation. Such request shall not delay the administration of the tests for more...
Reasonable Suspicion Testing. The Employer may, but does not have a legal duty to, request or require an employee to undergo drug and alcohol testing if the Employer or any supervisor of the employee has a reasonable suspicion (a belief based on specific facts and rational inferences drawn from those facts) related to the performance of the job that the employee:
1. Is under the influence of drugs or alcohol while the employee is working or while the employee is on the Employer's premises or operating the Employer's vehicle, machinery, or equipment; or
2. Has used, possessed, sold, purchased or transferred drugs, alcohol or drug paraphernalia while the employee was working or while the employee was on the Employer's premises or operating the Employer's vehicle, machinery or equipment; or
3. Has sustained a personal injury as that term is defined in Minnesota Statutes §176.011, Subd. 16, or has caused another person to die or sustain a personal injury; or
4. Was operating or helping to operate machinery, equipment, or vehicles involved in a work-related accident resulting in property damage or personal injury and the Employer or investigating supervisor has a reasonable suspicion that the cause of the accident may be related to the use of drugs or alcohol. Whenever it is possible and practical to do so, more than one Agent of the Employer shall be involved in reasonable suspicion determinations under this LOA.
Reasonable Suspicion Testing.
A. Reasonable suspicion testing for alcohol, marijuana or controlled substances may be directed by the Employer for any employee when there is reason to suspect that alcohol, marijuana or controlled substance usage may be adversely affecting the employee’s job performance or that the employee may present a danger to the physical safety of the employee or others. Specific objective grounds must be stated in writing that support the reasonable suspicion.
Reasonable Suspicion Testing. An employee shall submit to and be tested at the request of a Trained Supervisory Employee in the event that sufficient information exists to support a position of reasonable suspicion that the employee may be under the influence of a controlled substance, an illegal substance, and/or alcohol. A “
Reasonable Suspicion Testing. All Employees Performing Safety-Sensitive Functions, and All University Employees in Bargaining Units B and E
A. Reasonable suspicion testing for alcohol, marijuana or other controlled substances may be directed by the University for any employee performing safety-sensitive functions or any employee of the University in bargaining units B and E when there is reason to suspect that alcohol, marijuana or other controlled substance use may be adversely affecting the employee’s job performance or that the employee may present a danger to the physical safety of the employee or another.
B. Specific objective grounds must be stated in writing that support the reasonable suspicion. Examples of specific objective grounds include but are not limited to:
1. Physical symptoms consistent with marijuana, other controlled substance and/or alcohol use;
2. Evidence or observation of marijuana, other controlled substance or alcohol use, possession, sale, or delivery; or
3. The occurrence of an accident(s) where a trained manager, supervisor or lead worker suspects marijuana, other controlled substance/alcohol use may have been a factor.
Reasonable Suspicion Testing a. Where the Agency has a reasonable suspicion that en employee is under the influence of any alcoholic intoxicants or controlled substances, including marijuana, or has a controlled substance, including marijuana, present in the body, the Agency may require that the employee immediately consent and submit to field and impairment tests and sampling (blood, urine or Breathalyzer test) at an approved laboratory. The Agency shall pay for the costs of the tests. A refusal to consent and submit to any of these tests shall be deemed the same as a positive test result.
b. When the employee is notified he or she is required to consent and submit to such test, or to searches as described in Section 8 of this Article, he or she may request the presence of a Union representative to witness the tests or searches. The tests or searches may not be unduly delayed in order to wait for a representative. The absence of a representative shall not be grounds for the employee to refuse to consent and submit to such tests or searches, however the Agency shall make every reasonable effort to provide a Union representative. The presence of a representative shall not disrupt or interfere with the tests or searches.
c. Before a supervisor, acting on behalf of the Agency under this policy, may require an employee to consent and submit to any test(s) specified in this section, the supervisor must first obtain concurrence from the supervisor’s department head or his designee that the information available to the Agency about the subject employee is sufficient to determine reasonable suspicion that prohibited conduct will be established as a result of such test(s).
d. The employee shall give consent to a blood, urine or Breathalyzer test by signing a consent form. The form shall contain the following information:
1. Employees consent to release test results to the Agency;
2. The procedure for confirming an initial positive test result for a controlled substance, including marijuana;
3. The consequences of a confirmed positive test result for a controlled substance, including marijuana;
4. The consequences of a positive test for alcohol, including one at or above .02% by volume/weight of alcohol in the blood;
5. A listing provided by the employee of legally prescribed and over-the-counter medications which may be in the employee’s body. At the employee’s option, this information may be submitted in a sealed envelope to be opened only by the Medical Review Officer if the test result is p...
Reasonable Suspicion Testing. No employee shall be required to submit to drug or alcohol 46 testing without reasonable suspicion except as otherwise required by law or this agreement. All 1 drug and alcohol testing shall be conducted in accordance with District policy and procedures for 2 drug and alcohol testing.
Reasonable Suspicion Testing a. A reasonable suspicion test will be based upon a trained supervisor’s conclusion, as a result of examining all of the pertinent facts, that prohibited drug or alcohol use may have contributed to or caused a critical incident: or may limit an employee’s capacity to function in a safety sensitive position. (The term supervisor shall include all supervisory and managerial staff members as defined in the EERA - Government Code Section 3540 et seq.) A reasonable suspicion test must be based upon specific, contemporaneous, articulable observations concerning the appearance, behavior, speech, or body odors of the driver. For suspicion of alcohol or controlled substance use, the observations may also include indications of chronic and withdrawal effects.
b. The observations must be made by a supervisor who has received a total of three hours training in identifying indicators of probable alcohol misuse and in identifying indicators of probable controlled substance use. Training shall be conducted by a substance abuse professional.
c. If the reasonable suspicion observations are made by the immediate supervisor of the driver, they must be confirmed by the direct observation of another supervisor similarly trained.
d. For the purposed of testing authorized by the Code of Federal Regulations, reasonable suspicion observations must be contemporaneous, i.e., they must be made just before, during or just after the driver’s performance of a safety-sensitive duty.
e. Drivers for whom a reasonable suspicion determination has been made will be placed on paid administrative leave pending receipt of initial test results.
f. Tests based on reasonable suspicion of alcohol misuse shall be promptly administered.
1. If the test is not given within two hours following the reasonable suspicion determination, the employer shall prepare and maintain on file a statement of the reasons the test was not promptly administered.
2. If requested by the employee, a copy of this statement shall be provided to the employee within a reasonable period of time.
3. No test based on reasonable suspicion of alcohol misuse will be given that is not within eight hours of the reasonable suspicion determination.
g. A written record of the reasonable suspicion observations for controlled substances, dated and signed by all supervisors making the observations, must be made within 24 hours or before the result of the controlled substance test(s) are released, whichever is earlier. If requested by the emp...
Reasonable Suspicion Testing. Reasonable suspicion that an employee used or is using a controlled substance or alcohol in an unlawful or abusive manner may be based upon, but not limited to:
1. Observable phenomena, such as direct observation of drug or alcohol use or possession and/or the physical symptoms of being under the influence of a drug or alcohol;
2. A pattern of abnormal conduct or erratic behavior;
3. Conviction for a drug or alcohol-related offense, or the identification of an employee as the focus of a criminal investigation into illegal drug or alcohol possession, use, or trafficking. The employee is responsible for notifying the City, within five (5) working days, of any drug-related conviction;
4. Information provided by reliable and/or credible sources or independently corroborated regarding an employee’s substance abuse;
5. Evidence that an employee had tampered with a previous drug test, and
6. Facts or circumstances developed in the course of an authorized investigation of an accident or unsafe working practice. The City representative must make a written record of the observations leading to a drug or alcohol test within twenty-four (24) hours of the observed behavior or before the test results are reported, whichever is earlier. Any employee who demonstrates job performance impairments consistent with reasonable suspicion characteristics shall be relieved of duty with pay pending an investigation and testing of condition. In such case the employee shall be transported by City personnel to the sample collection location and to his/her home. Employees with a negative drug test and/or alcohol test below 0.04 will be returned to duty if not otherwise in violation of this policy. Testing under this section may be for drugs or alcohol or both.
