Source – Associated Press

September 1, 2009

Little Rock police said Monday that one man died and another was hospitalized after they were found unconscious along a city street from an apparent overdose of a drug extracted from a prescription pain patch.

Two men were found unresponsive with one having a prescription for a prescription pain releiver patch.   On person died and the other told police that they removed gel from the patch and ingested it.

“Bad situation,” Little Rock police spokesman Lt. Terry Hastings said. “Don’t do that.”

Hastings said autopsy results were pending  and charges have not been filed, though the investigation is continuing.”This guy had a prescription; he did not have the patch illegally. Giving his friend some may be illegal,” Hastings said.

December 2008 – Pacific Business News

Officials with the United Public Workers labor union on Tuesday signed an agreement with Maui County to allow its members to be randomly tested for alcohol and drugs in the workplace.

The agreement covers approximately 400 workers with the UPW, which include custodians, park caretakers, plumbers and carpenters.

Officials for the union and Maui Mayor Charmaine Tavares said Tuesday that the agreement is an attempt to provide safer work environments for laborers.

The agreement contains provisions for both random and reasonable suspicion testing, which will be implemented next spring.

www.navigent3.com
Drug Free Workplace Solutions

Source: Fox Report – Fox News

Should drug-dealing public school employees be permitted?

Should that even be a question?

It is if you live in Hawaii.

The headline in The Washington Post on Sunday morning sums it up: “Despite Agreement, Hawaii Teachers Resist Drug Testing.” Does it get much plainer than that? Not according to reporter Mark Niesse:

Hawaii public school teachers signed off on first-in-the-nation statewide random drug testing in exchange for pay raises, but now the state claims the educators are trying to take the money and run.

Since the teachers’ union approved the pact nearly two years ago, they have accepted the 11 percent boost in pay while fighting the random tests as an illegal violation of their privacy rights. No teacher has been tested.

The showdown over teacher drug testing arose from the highly publicized arrests of six state Education Department employees in unrelated drug cases over a six-month period. One, Leilehua High School special education teacher Lee Anzai, pleaded guilty to selling more than $40,000 worth of crystal methamphetamine to an undercover agent.

To sum up the situation, the public schools have a drug problem–but they don’t know how big a problem it is, because there’s no drug testing.

Most Americans have come to accept workplace drug-testing as a necessary part of any comprehensive anti-drug program, but not the Hawaii teachers union.

And as for public school employees, well, you might think they would want to do everything possible to root out druggies from their midst–but if you thought that, you thought wrong. Instead, the public employee unions seem determined to obstruct efforts to clean up the mess. Most Americans have come to accept workplace drug-testing as a necessary part of any comprehensive anti-drug program, but not the Hawaii teachers union.

To her credit, Hawaii’s Republican Governor, Linda Lingle, has been pushing for a tougher approach to testing. But she is just one voice; powerful as she might be, she can be overruled by the combined power of the bureaucracy and the judiciary, backed up by the overwhelming Democratic state legislature.

A thorough rethinking of America’s educational system has long been needed: Just how do we get good teachers into the schools, and bad teachers out of the schools? But if this drug-testing case is any sort of indicator, we aren’t likely to get such a rethink. And yet this is not just a state issue–it is a national issue.

By coincidence, President-elect Barack Obama is in Hawaii now, on vacation. He has nothing to do with this sort of local scandal–yet. But once he becomes President, he will have some indirect responsibility for these and many other thorny questions.

As President, his job duties will include improving education. Yes, education has traditionally been a local concern, but over the last 30 years, Presidents of both parties have embraced a substantial federal role in upgrading the schools, as a matter of social justice as well as international competitiveness. As President Ronald Reagan put it, back in 1983, we are “a nation at risk,” jeopardized by underperforming education.

And so while the recent “report cards” issued by the National Assessment of Educational Progress tests are ambiguous as to actual improvements in test scores, what’s decisively unambiguous is the degree to which America is falling behind the rest of the world. According to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, the U.S. currently ranks 18th out of 36 industrialized countries. As one expert, Jacob Funk Kirkegaard of the Peterson Institute, told United Press International: “The United States has rested on its laurels way too long, Other countries have increasingly caught up and surpassed the United States.”

Some experts say that we need to inject market forces–choice and competition–into education to make it better and more cost-effective. Others say that we mostly need more money. But it’s hard to imagine any legitimate expert saying that our national education strategy should include drugged-up teachers and other school employees remaining on the job.

And beginning next year, President Obama’s education secretary will be a longtime friend and colleague, Arne Duncan, the current Chicago schools chief. Which is to say, Secretary Duncan should be able to pick up the phone and say, “Mr. President, I think that we have a problem in Hawaii, where the teachers unions are resisting the most obvious and basic of reforms.” It will then be revealing how the 44th President responds.

54 MBTA workers who failed drug tests still on job

BOSTON – More than 50 MBTA employees who failed random drug or alcohol tests over the last two years remain on the job.

The Boston Herald reviewed the transit system’s testing records after two trolley operators who were involved in accidents last month were fired after failing drug tests.

Of the more than 8,700 employees who were randomly tested since 2006, the review found 77 had failed, 23 of whom eventually lost their jobs or resigned. Fifty-four remain at work.
Story continues below ↓advertisement | your ad here

The Herald reported that 12 bus drivers, two train operators and three streetcar operators were among those fired.

The T’s two-strike policy gives employees who fail substance abuse tests a second chance following a 40-day unpaid suspension. Operators who fail a test after an accident are fired immediately.

(Source-Daily Examiner-Australia)
A POLICE operation has revealed that one in 38 truck drivers to be driving under the influence of drugs.

The statistic comes from the results of a three-day roadside drug testing blitz run by police.

Most of the truck drivers pleaded guilty.
As the test only screened for THC (marijuana) and methamphetamine, the actual number of drivers using drugs improperly is likely much higher.
The abuse of prescription drugs is the number one threat across most of the world according to international drug councils.

www.navigent3.com
Drug Free Workplace Solutions

oral-fluid-drug-testing

Drugging and driving on the rise in B.C.

Updated: Wed Dec. 10 2008 14:54:18

Darcy Wintonyk, ctvbc.ca

A new study says drinking and driving is slowing in B.C. — but it’s not all good news.

The 2008 British Columbia Roadside Survey found while fewer people were driving after drinking, many more were driving high.

Of 1,533 drivers surveyed in June by the Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse, more than 10 per cent showed evidence of drug use, while 8.1 per cent tested positive for alcohol.

A total of 16.9 per cent tested positive for drugs, alcohol, or both.

Doug Beirness, a senior researcher at the CCSA, says while the findings about drinking and driving are encouraging, the message about drugs and driving may not be getting through.

“People still don’t think the use of drugs impairs their ability to drive a car,” said Beirness.

He cites the fact that while 16 to 18-year-olds didn’t test positive for booze, some were under the influence of drugs, which indicates they may not understand the risk associated with being high and driving.

Beirness says despite perceptions that drug use is less harmful to drivers, there is growing evidence drug impairment is also a major contributor to crashes.

A study conducted in 2004 showed that drugs, often combined with alcohol, were detected in up to 30% of fatally injured drivers.

Some interesting findings from the study:

* Drivers testing positive for drugs were represented by most age groups every night the survey was taken.
* Age was not a factor in drug use among most drivers.
* Middle-aged drivers, 45-54 years old, led positive testings for drugs.
* This behaviour decreased somewhat in drivers aged 55 and older.
* Drugs most frequently found were cannabis, cocaine, opiates, and cannabis and cocaine in combination.
* Drinking and driving peaked on Saturday nights.

The Roadside Alcohol and Drug Survey 2008 was conducted Wednesday through Saturday nights in Vancouver, Saanich and Abbotsford in June 2008. Of all drivers surveyed, 90 per cent agreed to provide a breath sample to measure alcohol levels and 80 per cent volunteered to provide a sample of oral fluid (saliva) to test for drug use.

The full report is expected to be released in early 2009.

The findings will be used to evaluate the effects of Bill C-2, legislation that allows police to conduct roadside comprehensive drug testing.

Read for yourself and decide:
ACLU Brings Legal Challenge to Planned Random Drug Testing of West Virginia Public School Employees

By Huntingtonnews.net Staff

Charleston, WV (HNN) – The American Civil Liberties Union on Saturday, Dec. 6, 2008 filed a legal challenge that seeks to halt the proposed random, suspicionless drug testing of nearly all Kanawha County public school employees.

Partnering with the West Virginia Education Association (WVEA), the ACLU brief argues that in addition to being ineffective and costly, drug testing without cause violates public servants’ constitutional right to privacy and should be blocked by the court.

“The proposed random drug testing of public school employees is an affront to our fundamental rights and a senseless waste of scarce taxpayer dollars that will not increase student safety,” said Adam Wolf, an attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union. “Public servants should not be required to surrender their constitutional rights as a condition of serving their community.”

The proposed random drug testing policy was adopted by the Kanawha County School Board in October after months of contentious debate and is set to take effect January 1, 2009. Specifically, the Board acted to significantly and inaccurately expand the definition of “safety-sensitive” employees in an effort to allow for the random drug testing of these positions, according to the ACLU.

The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that the government may only conduct suspicionless drug tests of employees in “safety-sensitive” job roles, such as air traffic controllers or nuclear power plant operators, whose job functions, if done improperly, would cause specific and potentially catastrophic threats to the public safety.

The privacy protections under West Virginia law prohibit the blanket, random drug testing of virtually all public education employees, as proposed by the Kanawha County School Board, according to the ACLU.

In addition to violating public employees’ constitutional right to privacy, random drug testing programs have been found demonstrably ineffective by the National Academy of Sciences, among others, producing a false sense of security that distracts from actual safety threats.

Random drug testing may also reveal extremely sensitive personal information, such as medical conditions, prescription drug use or pregnancy, and can produce an unacceptably high rate of false-positives, resulting in suspicion cast on entirely innocent educators.

“West Virginia’s current statute already provides the opportunity for testing any employee suspected of drug use,” said WVEA President Dale Lee, who, along with the organization, is a named petitioner in the lawsuit. “The policy passed by the Kanawha County School Board is both unnecessary and costly. While employees do not fear drug testing, they are concerned about the loss of privacy and believe there are many larger, more pressing issues that the County needs to address and allocate resources toward.”

Critics of the planned drug testing program also point out that it will teach a perverse civics lesson to West Virginia’s students: that the democratic and constitutional values taught in the classroom are meaningless in the real world.

“Students should be taught to cherish and uphold our constitutional rights, including the fundamental right of personal privacy,” said Terri Baur, Legal Director of the ACLU of West Virginia. “Rather than squander precious resources on baseless dragnet searches of innocent educators’ bodily fluid, we should allocate funding toward comprehensive, fact-based education about the dangers of drug and alcohol misuse and counseling to students in need. That is the best way both to protect students now and to provide them the tools to protect themselves down the road.”

The ACLU and WVEA legal challenge, filed in the Circuit Court of Kanawha County, West Virginia, seeks an injunction barring the proposed random drug testing policy from going forward, as well as a ruling that declares the plan unconstitutional.

Source: Susan Lazaruk, The Province

Published: Friday, August 22, 2008

A new drug-and-alcohol policy that requires unionized construction workers in B.C. to be tested before being hired and after they’ve been involved in an accident likely won’t withstand a legal or human-rights challenge, legal experts said yesterday.

Workers must agree to be tested for alcohol and nine drugs, including marijuana, when they’re hired by a company and periodically afterward, according to an agreement between employers and unions.

“We have tried to provide as safe a workplace as we can,” said industry spokesman Clyde Scollan. “We have both a moral and legal obligation to do so.”

View Larger Image

Concrete finisher Wyatt Guignard, 23, said he welcomes the new testing rules because it provides for a safer workplace on construction sites where he or a co-worker would be responsible for operating heavy, dangerous equipment.

“As a non-drug-and-alcohol user, I think it’s good,” he said. “There are no negatives.”

Mandatory employee drug testing is illegal in Canada because it discriminates against drug-dependent candidates under human-rights laws because addiction is defined as a disability.

Scollan said the policy was agreed to by unions, unlike a similar one in Alberta.

He also said the testing isn’t mandatory because “some people will choose not to work there [at the unionized shops subject to testing].”

But Kelowna labour lawyer Robert Smithson said those arguments wouldn’t hold up at a human-rights tribunal.

“The golden rule of negotiated labour agreements is that you cannot contract out of human rights laws,” he said.

“There would be a lot of lawyers willing to take the case. And I expect it to be tested.”

Micheal Vonn of the B.C. Civil Liberties agreed: “You can’t contract out your constitutional rights or your human rights. Random drug testing of workers is never justified.”

Last year, however, an Alberta court upheld a labour arbitrator’s ruling that Petro Canada was justified in testing its employees for drugs with two months’ notice at an oilsands construction site in 2004.

Scollan also noted B.C.’s policy makes a point in post-accident testing of gauging only “current impairment” of THC, the active ingredient in marijuana that can show up in urine tests for weeks.

Workers then must submit to a blood or saliva test, which Scollan said can pinpoint consumption to within hours.

“The objective is to ensure sobriety on the job without prying into the private after-hours activities of workers,” said a joint press release signed by Scollan and Mark Olsen for the labourers union.

“We opted for a non-invasive testing policy, which is designed to measure possible current impairment on the job, not what you did last week,” Olsen said in the release.

But Smithson and Vonn said they are unaware of technology that could determine when drugs were consumed.

“This is precisely the stumbling block for allowing drug testing in the workplace,” said Smithson.

Vonn also said such tests “are predicated on the fact that what’s causing safety concerns is employees’ impairment. We would like to see some evidence of that.”

Problems with urine-base DOT drug testing continue…. 2008

GAO: Truck drivers taking illegal drugs get hired

WASHINGTON (AP) — Tractor-trailer and bus drivers who tested positive for illegal drugs have flouted federal regulations by returning to work without the required treatment, in some cases transporting hazardous materials for many months, congressional investigators say.

The study by the Government Accountability Office, obtained Tuesday by The Associated Press, is the latest to detail problems involving unfit commercial drivers who can operate vehicles weighing 40 tons or more.

The GAO found that 19 out of 37 commercial drivers who had a positive drug test in the last two years were hired elsewhere less than a month later — keeping quiet about their previous test result.

These tractor-trailer or bus drivers, who had tested positive for cocaine, amphetamines or marijuana, passed a new pre-employment drug test either by quickly going clean or using products such as synthetic urine to mask drug use. They subsequently operated commercial vehicles for periods ranging from one month to over a year, GAO said.

Transportation Department regulations require that prospective employers request drug-testing records — with the commercial driver’s consent — from previous employers. But because some drivers testing positive do not go through treatment and do not disclose test results, the new company might not be aware of drug use if it does not vigorously investigate.

The House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, led by Rep. James Oberstar, D-Minn., is currently looking at ways to help get unfit commercial drivers off the nation’s highways. One proposal would create a clearinghouse for drug test results for commercial truck drivers to make it easier for employers to conduct checks.

Some cases cited by GAO:

_A Tennessee truck driver tested positive for cocaine in May 2007. He moved to a different employer and was rehired after passing a new test eight days later. Prior to his tests, the driver was charged with possession of a controlled substance. He worked for several months afterward, driving trucks containing cargo and hazardous material.

_An Oklahoma truck driver tested positive for marijuana in October 2007 and passed a subsequent test with another company nine days later. The driver told investigators he “took appropriate measures to clean his system before applying at the second employer.” The new employer said it was unaware of the prior drug test during the hiring and let him drive for a couple of months, but that he was now no longer working for the company.

The latest review comes after a GAO safety study disclosed by the AP earlier this month found hundreds of thousands of drivers carry commercial licenses even though they also qualify for full federal disability payments

. According to that report, 563,000 commercial drivers were determined by the Veterans Affairs Department, Labor Department or Social Security Administration to be eligible for benefits over health issues, with alarming examples that raised doubts about the safety of the nation’s highways.

Last week, lawmakers in the House scolded federal regulators for failing to implement recommendations made in 2001 that are aimed at keeping medically unfit commercial truck and bus drivers off the roads.

In the latest GAO study, investigators looked at data from a third-party administrator for commercial drivers who had tested positive for illegal drugs with one employer and then negative for another employer. The GAO then identified cases from the past two years where drivers had tested negative less than a month after a positive result.

On the Net:
Government Accountability Office: http://www.gao.gov
House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee: http://transportation.house.gov/

THC Detection

First and forement, devices / techniques must screen for THC-delta-9 in oral fluid NOT THC-COOH and/or delta-11, etc. The latter is a metabolite found only in urine at any level that can be commonly detected, the former is the active ingreadient of marijuna and found in oral fluid.

Detection of THC-delta-9 in oral fluid has repeatedly been demonstrated to be possible from connsumption… up to 24 hours post consumption.

The following is one of several references available on this topic:

Relationship of (9)-tetrahydrocannabinol concentrations in oral fluid and plasma after controlled administration of smoked cannabis byHuestis MA, Cone EJ.Intramural Research Program,National Institute on Drug Abuse, National Institutes of Health,Baltimore, Maryland 21224. J Anal Toxicol. 2004 Sep;28(6):394-9

ABSTRACT
Understanding the relationship of (9)-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) concentrations in oral fluid and plasma is important in interpretation of oral fluid test results. Current evidence suggests that THC is deposited in the oral cavity during cannabis smoking. This “depot” represents the primary or sole source of THC found when oral fluid is collected and analyzed. In this research, oral fluid and plasma specimens were collected from six subjects following smoking of cannabis cigarettes containing 1.75% and 3.55% THC. There was at least one week between each cannabis administration. Plasma specimens were analyzed by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) and paired oral fluid specimens were analyzed by radioimmunoassay (RIA). In addition, one individual’s oral fluid specimens were also analyzed by GC-MS. These data are unique in that they represent simultaneous or near simultaneous collection of oral fluid and plasma specimens in subjects following controlled cannabis dosing. The first oral fluid specimen, collected from one subject at 0.2 h following initiation of smoking, contained a THC concentration of 5800 ng/mL (GC-MS). The similarity in oral fluid and plasma THC concentrations following the dissipation of the initial “contamination” indicates the likelihood of a physiological link between these specimens. Recent studies have shown that sublingual or transmucosal administration of pure THC results in direct absorption of intact THC into the bloodstream, thereby bypassing the gastrointestinal tract. The current study demonstrates that THC is deposited in the oral cavity and remains for up to 24 h following cannabis smoking. The decline in THC oral fluid concentration over this time suggests that there may be absorption of THC into blood as previously shown with pure THC. Passive cannabis exposure studies appear to indicate that positive oral fluid tests for THC can occur shortly after cannabis smoke exposure, but results were negative within 1 h. Consequently, when very recent passive exposure to cannabis smoke can be ruled out, it is concluded that a positive oral fluid test provides credible evidence of active cannabis use.