The bottom line is: how much loss and risk is acceptable to the employer compared to the cost of prevention?
this industry and our responsibility to our clients, the keywords really are: safe and drug-free workplace. We can lose sight of that sometimes because these debates are emotional, political, confusing and let’s face it—money is at stake.
Costs and Risks First and foremost, the risks of employee marijuana use should be well understood. A study published in the Journal of Legal Medicine shows that employees who test positive for marijuana had 55 percent more industrial accidents and 85 percent more injuries compared to those that tested negative. Additionally, employees who tested positive for marijuana had absenteeism rates 75 percent higher than those that tested negative (Crites- Leoni). Full-time workers ages 18–49 who reported current illicit drug use are more likely than those reporting no drug use to state they had worked for 3 or more employers in the past year, had taken an unexcused absence from work in the past month, had voluntarily leſt an employer in the past year, and been fired by an employer in the past year (SAMHSA). Tis same report also lists employees self-reporting an increased likelihood of requesting early dismissal or time off, hav- ing absences of 8 days or more, increased tardiness and five times greater workers’ compensation claims. Costs for employers is a risk factor but are oſten not tracked by the small business owner who fails to understand or track the losses of produc- tivity and the costs of accidents, injuries, absenteeism, and employee turnover. It is estimated that drug and alcohol abuse use costs the U.S. economy $246 billion per year (NIDA). Whereas a consistent workplace drug testing program used in conjunction with an effective policy has been proven to save employers money in the long-term. Various studies have shown economic losses on individual employ- ees who use drugs to be anywhere from
10 datia focus
$6,600–13,000 per year based on damages and health care costs (Bell). As clientele present questions per-
taining to the costs of drug tests, the re- sponse must include the impending price tag of neglecting to maintain an effective drug testing program. The bottom line is: how much loss and risk is acceptable to the employer compared to the cost of prevention? If we can help change the perception to a focus on employee health and safety, we will do a great service to our customers.
Denial and Reality Secondly, we need to help the employer understand that denial is their enemy. According to NSDUH, nine percent of the workforce uses drugs regularly (SAMHSA). In a very small business with just 10 employees, it is very likely that at least one person abuses drugs or alcohol on a regular basis and comes to work impaired. According to the Quest Diagnostics Drug Testing Index, employees testing positive for marijuana have increased 6.2 percent nationally, but in Colorado and Washington positive marijuana tests have increased 20 percent and 23 percent, respectively (Quest Diagnostics). While positive drug test re- sults were trending down for many years, recent studies show new increases since the legalization movement has popu- larized (SAMHSA). Greater use rates combined with unlimited THC potency and new methods of powerful delivery systems (edibles, vaporizers, waxes, etc.) are changing impairment as was com- monly understood it in the past. It is no longer true that the effect of
marijuana wears off in just a few hours. Testimonials from individuals eating marijuana products from Colorado note they felt impaired for 24 hours or more (Dowd). This is significant for employers to understand when they are faced with an employee who asserts that
spring 2015
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76