TO TEST OR NOT TO TEST “I had a carpenter who was a top performer,” says Jerry Liu, owner of D.G. Liu Contractor, in Dickerson, Md. “He cut a blazing swath with profit and customer satisfaction. But then it was like turning a switch. He disappeared for a week. His family didn’t know where he was. Then he called as if he were a different person and wanted to come back at a reduced rate.” A close friend who was a police detective told Liu that the employee was a known substance abuser and that Liu shouldn’t have that person or anyone he associated with working for his company. Liu let the man go and says he learned his lesson.
“In the [Washington] D.C. area, every third client has a law degree,” says Liu, who put a written drug policy in place soon after the carpenter incident. “I have to protect against putting the wrong person in someone’s home.” Now Liu tests when an employee is hired and randomly tests all employees.
Illustration: Katherine Streeter Yet the Berkeley, Calif., remodeler previously quoted isn’t interested in documenting a policy or confronting people. “You’re heading for a nightmare. If I’m a terminated employee with paper I have to sign, now I have something to discuss with a lawyer who may ask, ‘Did they intimidate you into signing it?” It’s great for lawyers but, on a practical level, it’s not good.”
D.S. Berenson, a northern Virginia-based attorney specializing in construction law (and a columnist for REMODELING), has heard that argument before. “Any policy will be a negative and a problem if it is poorly written or does not comply with applicable law,” he says. “But the risk of a wrongful termination claim is a gazillion times higher with no policy to point to and no guidelines to follow.”
Some owners don’t want to test because they don’t want to intrude on an employee’s private life or infringe upon their civil liberties, or because it will harm company morale. Some don’t test because of cost — although prices have come down in recent years as more companies regularly test. The cost range for a lab-checked 10-panel (10 drugs) urine test is between $35 and $45; do-it-yourself kits are available for half that cost but are less reliable. Other tests — including hair follicle, blood screening, and oral-fluid tests ( www.avitarinc.com) — are available, and costs vary. (For more information, visit www.nadfw.com.)
Other remodelers argue that because of a tight labor market they don’t want to set too many barriers when hiring. “We do a background check, but we don’t do a drug test on employees,” says a Baltimore-area remodeler who prefers to remain anonymous. “This industry is not the cleanest in the labor force. From a historical standpoint, you’re dealing with individuals that have some vices — like we all do. In a perfect world we’d have zero tolerance for all of it. But in reality we don’t suffocate employees with drug testing like corporate America does.”
Mason Hearn, owner of HomeMasons, in Manakin-Sabot, Va., says he was tempted to drop his company’s substance abuse policy because “a lot of good prospective employees who learn about it become disengaged and disqualify themselves as employees.”
About 10 years ago, Hearn caught an employee on a job smoking marijuana. Then he noticed a few other employees whose lateness and accidents made him suspicious. With the help of the nonprofit Richmond Metro Coalition Against Drugs and an attorney who worked with that group (at reduced rates), Hearn created a policy that clearly outlines what is expected from employees, the types of testing they may face, and what disciplinary actions would be taken. (To see the policy, go here.)
All of HomeMasons’ employees signed the policy documents and knew that they could be chosen at random for testing. “A couple of folks washed out pretty quickly and left the company,” says Hearn, who believes they most likely had drug problems. But since then he has had no issues. “We also get a 5% discount on workers’ comp because we have this written policy. And we tout the policy when we’re selling ourselves to our customers. They like to know that people building their projects are trustworthy and clear-headed.”
Most employers requiring drug screening opt for random urine testing. This can be done on everyone in the company or on a single class of workers, for example, those who use dangerous equipment or who handle bills. “Many employers have a lottery system, using the last four digits of a Social Security number and picking out two or three numbers monthly,” says George Ramos, managing partner with Diversified Risk Management, which does employee background and drug screening through its Employers Choice Online division. To keep morale up, Ramos suggests rewarding employees who test negative, not just taking actions against those who test positive.
One thing to be aware of is that symptoms of alcoholism may be similar to those of diabetes. And alcoholism, now considered a disease, is a protected class. You need to be careful of accusing someone of consuming alcohol on company time or property. It’s important to have a policy that states you can test someone for cause, such as abnormal attendance, involvement in an accident, or gross misconduct that might cause you concern for their safety or the safety of others. “Look at the results of a test and determine if an employee is taking prescription drugs, alcohol, or other, more serious drugs,” Ramos says. “Make sure you get your facts straight before you sit down and address the issue with the employee.”