Training for Making Determinations
What is reasonable suspicion? Reasonable suspicion training for making determinations of drug and/or alcohol use is not only federally required, but is also extremely critical now more than ever with drug use on the rise. With the current opioid crisis that is dominating our news, to the many states now including the use of recreational marijuana into their city/state statutes, all transportation employers should be vigilant and on the lookout for any signs and indicators that their covered employees may be impaired. While marijuana remains a Schedule I substance and is prohibited for any person to use who is subject to the DOT rules and regulations, the DOT rules alone do not prevent or deter use. Tat is where the trained supervisor comes in, with specialized knowledge and expertise to help uncover and detect those who may not be following the rules.
Surprising Outcomes Determining use of drugs or alcohol for those performing safety-sensitive functions is not only critical because of existing regulations or for the safety of the person subjected to the testing, but also for those of us under their care or around them. Tis testing is performed to ”rule out” potential drug or alcohol use as the cause of behavior, odors, speech, or actions of a person performing safety-sensitive functions in a DOT-covered position. Being that this testing is done to ”rule out” drug or alcohol use as being the reason for what was witnessed, most of the time the result is negative. With that said, while most of this testing does ultimately end in a negative result, several of the tests and the subsequent results do not. Te obvious alternative outcome, however, is not always a positive result or refusal to test as you might think. Trained supervisors making these determinations are not only helping to prevent the outcome of injuries to the employee themselves and the traveling
20 datia focus
public due to drug or alcohol use, they may very well save the life of the employee. While uncovering potential use of drugs or alcohol is a strong enough reason for the regulations as well as training and testing of the operator, another extremely important reason can be uncovered during the testing. Since the testing is made to “rule out” drug or alcohol use and not done as an accusation or diagnosis of an illness, the outcome can be very surprising at times to both the employee and employer!
Other Impairment Factors Uncovered from Determinations to Test
Other than drug or alcohol impairment, a large majority of reasonable suspicion testing ends with a health issue for the employee that s/he was either ignoring or was unaware of. For instance, one of these health issues could be a heart-related issue unknown to the employee. (Te details regarding the next few situations, while real, have been changed in order to relay the circumstances and outcomes without divulging any private information.) Here’s an example of one such outcome: An employer had a safety-sensitive employee who was exhibiting signs and symptoms of what could have been drug or alcohol use. Te employee was sweating profusely, her face was flushed, her speech was slurred, her eyes were bloodshot, and she was speaking a bit more slowly than normal while on the job at one of their customer locations. Te customer contacted the employer with their concerns. A trained supervisor immediately contacted the individual and instructed her to stop working and wait for him to arrive on-site. Upon arrival, he took her into a private area and explained what was witnessed and also explained that he was taking her to a clinic for both drug and alcohol testing. When the physician examined her, he determined she needed further testing to help determine the possible cause for her behavior. During this additional testing, the doctor discovered
that she had, that morning, experienced a mild heart atack. Te woman’s supervisor was told that during a mild heart atack the tongue can swell, which the doctor stated was the reason for her slurred speech as well as the other symptoms. Her tests for drugs and alcohol did come back negative. In another recorded testing incident, a
transportation worker geting up into his vehicle fell on the ground while geting onboard the very large commercial vehicle and behind the controls before starting his shiſt. When the transportation supervisor ran outside to ensure the driver was not injured, he noted that the driver was shaking, sweaty, confused, and that the driver mentioned he was a bit dizzy. Te trained supervisor made a reasonable suspicion determination and took the employee to a clinic to rule out drug use as a possible cause for the driver’s behavior. All of the indicators were discussed and documented with the physician, and more testing was ordered. Te tests performed aſter the drug collection determined the employee actually had a health-related issue that came as an extreme surprise to the driver—pre-diabetes. While either of these circumstances
could have been deadly at the time the testing determination was made or later for either the transportation operator or others, my last example demonstrates something completely different. While in a DOT- regulated vehicle, a driver was performing her duty of motoring down the road to her destination. Suddenly, she began to drive so erratically that people around her began to call the police. Tey were concerned for their own safety as well as the safety of the driver. She was pulled over by local authorities. She called her supervisor to let him know, and was then subjected to questions, field sobriety tests, and a breath alcohol test conducted by a state official. By the time her supervisor arrived, the breath alcohol test had been performed, and it had ended with a negative result. Te state
winter 2019
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
