Drug Testing
Dépistage des drogues
Special Energy Conference
Conférence spéciale de l’énergie
Vancouver
Thierry Duhin
ICEM
Outline – En bref




Brief overview of the ICEM
Bref survol de l’ICEM
Drug testing worldwide
Dépistage des drogues dans le monde
Union and other positions
Positions syndicales et autres
Possible attitudes
Attitudes possibles
International Federation of Chemical, Energy, Mine and
General Workers' Unions
Fédération internationale des syndicats de travailleurs de
la chimie, de l'énergie, des mines et des industries
diverses
Affiliés 389 Affiliates
Pays 122 Countries
Membres 20 000 000 Members
Industries







Energy (Oil, Gas, Electric Power)
Energies (Pétrole, gaz, électricité)
Mining & DGOJP
Mines et DGOJP
Chemical & Bio-Science
(Pharmaceuticals)
Chimie et bio-sciences (Pharmacie)
Rubber (Tyre, Other Rubber)
Caoutchouc (pneus, autres)
Materials (Glass, Ceramics, Cement)
Matériaux (verre, céramique, ciment)
Pulp & Paper
Pâte et papier
Services and Miscellaneous
Services et divers
Regions









Asia / Pacific
Asie et Pacifique
Central Europe
Europe centrale
Eastern Europe, Central Asia and Trans-Caucasus
Europe orientale, Asie centrale et Tran-Caucase
Nordic Countries
Pays nordiques
North Africa and Middle East
Afrique du Nord et Moyen-Orient
North America
Amérique du Nord
South and Central Africa
Afrique australe et centrale
South and Central America & the Caribbean
Amérique du Sud et Centrale & Caraïbes
Western Europe
Europe occidentale
21st Century Energy – The ICEM Vision
Energie au 21è Siècle – La vision de l’ICEM







We want safe, affordable, accessible energy
Nous voulons une énergie sure, abordable et accéssible
We want good jobs in sustainable industries
Nous voulons des emplois de qualité dans des industries
durables
Workers are key stakeholders
Les travailleurs sont des acteurs-clé
Achievement of just, equitable and sustainable societies
Obtention de sociétés justes, équitables et durables
No to narrow finance driven models
Non à des modèles financiers étroits
Developing Global Agreements
Développement d’Accords mondiaux
Building Regional and Global Networks
Construction de réseaux régionaux et mondiaux
ICEM Global Agreements
Company
Country
Statoil
Norway
Employees
Signed
17 000
Jul 1998
Freudenberg Germany
30 000
Jun 2000
Endesa
28 000
Jan 2002
Norske Skog Norway
11 000
Jun 2002
Anglogold
South Africa
53 000
Sep 2002
ENI
Italy
70 000
Nov 2002
RAG
Germany
92 000
Aug 2003
SCA
Sweden
45 000
Apr 2004
Lukoil
Russia
96 000
May 2004
EDF
France
167 000
Jan 2005
Rhodia
France
20 000
Feb 2005
Lafarge
France
77 000
Sep 2005
Spain
706 000
www.icem.org
www.icem.org
Workplace Drug Testing
How it all started
‘War against drug’ in the US
 Since 1960’s drug abuse a concern
 Ronald Reagan’s Drug-Free Workplace Act of
1988

Where we stand
(US figures)

1983 less than 1%
 Nowadays, about half of the full-time workers
aged 18-49
 Up 277 % from 1987
Junk science
The ‘Firestone Study’

$100-billion in lost productivity
 2.5 times more absence
 3.6 more accidents
 5 times more compensation claims
How reliable are the tests?
Depronil (to treat Parkinson’s disease)
shows up as amphetamine
 Codeine (used in some pain-killers)
shows as morphine
 Ibuprofen (over-the-counter anti-inflammatory)
shows up as marijuana
 Poppy seed in bakery
shows up as heroine

What the law says
USA
NOT required under the 1988 Act
 Most private employers have the right to test
 In unionized workforces, the implementation of
testing programs must be negotiated.

What the law says
UK
The following legislation is applicable:
 The Health and Safety at Work Act 1974
 The Safety Representatives and Safety Committee
Regulations Act 1977
 The Road Traffic Act 1988
 The Misuse of Drugs Act 1971
 The Transport and Works Act 1992
 The Data Protection Act 1998
What the law says
Canada


No legislation for nor against
Canadian Human Rights Commission policy on drug
testing
It’s an industry of its own
2.5 times more absence
 3.6 more accidents
 5 times more compensation

Real world facts and figures:
 Between 20 and 50m tests a year
 Up to $1,5 billion a year excluding service fees
Situation in several countries
USA
ICEM affiliate USWA
 Few successes with challenges
 Substance abuse in the industry remains an
unresolved issue
Situation in several countries
UK
ICEM affiliate AMICUS
 Education programmes
 Negotiation in six stages
1) Consultation between trade union representatives and
employers
2) The framework of the policy should contain information
on aims, responsibility, definition, education, training,
support, confidentiality, disciplinary action and monitoring
and reviewing
3) Decision to be made on testing
4) Reaching agreement
5) Implementation of the policy
6) Monitoring and reviewing
Situation in several countries
Australia
Formal and informal policies and practices
 Developed in an ad hoc manner
 Employee assistance programs (EAPs)

Situation in several countries
Azerbaijan
ICEM affiliate Oil and Gas Workers’ Union
 Drugs and alcohol dependency do not have the
scale of a problem.
 Youth involvement work
 Recommendations
 Specific union efforts on off-shore installations
 Part of general health and safety prevention
Situation in several countries
Belgium


No specific legislation
General Medical Council has established strict
guidelines in 1993
ICEM affiliate La Centrale Générale
ExxonMobil’s Policy on Alcohol and Drugs
Problem that can be dealt with
Situation in several countries
Denmark
No legislation
 The offshore sector has introduced guidelines
 The union has accepted them

ICEM affiliate EL-Forbund
 No agreement over WDT.
 Danish Confederation of Trade Unions has
Situation in several countries
Finland


Mostly pre-employment testing
Usually workplaces negotiated
ICEM affiliate Kemianliitto
 The Finnish energy company Fortum has adopted a
programme on prevention of drugs and the misuse
of alcohol on January this year.
Situation in several countries
Croatia
ICEM affiliate EKN
 Not the part of collective agreements
 One recent court case
Situation in several countries
Chile
WDT requires a company policy
 Never compulsory
 If in the works regulations, disciplinary measures
can be taken

Situation in several countries
Puerto Rico
Ley 59, 1997 specifically addresses WDT
 Legal in the private sector
 Employer has to have a clear policy
 When unionized, part of the collective agreement

Situation in several countries
Greece

Only at the pre-employment stage, for Security
Services (law of 1997)
Situation in several countries
Ireland


No legislation
Most of the testing is at the pre-employment level
mostly by companies having their parent company
in the US
Situation in several countries
Luxembourg
No specific legislation
 HIV-test is forbidden.
 Some private companies do WDT

Situation in several countries
Portugal
No law
 Tripartite dialogue in 1999
 No regulations have been enforced

Situation in several countries
Sweden


No law
Usually negotiated between employer and
employees
Situation in several countries
Switzerland



Drugs of Abuse Testing Guidelines by the Swiss
Working Group for Drugs of Abuse
Recommendations not legally binding
WDT is only performed in the area of public
transportation, military, private schools, and very
few private companies (like car industry,
pharmaceutical industry), mainly in form of preemployment testing.
Situation in several countries
The Netherlands
There is no legislation
 Pre employment drug testing prohibited by law
 WDT considered an infringement of the individual
privacy.
 Exists in petrochemical or shipping industry
 Employees have the right to refuse.
 Agreement about procedures between the
employer and the workers council

What the ILO says
Ce que dit l’OIT
Guiding principles on drug and alcohol testing in
the workplace
Interregional Tripartite Experts Meeting on Drug
and Alcohol Testing in the Workplace, 1993
Principes directeurs relatifs à la détection de
l'alcool et des drogues sur le lieu de travail,
Réunion tripartite interrégionale d'experts sur la
détection de l'alcool et des drogues sur le lieu
de travail, 1993
What the ILO says
Overview
 Formal written policy
 Consensus
Effectiveness of drug testing
 Scientific evidence is equivocal
 No sufficient evidence to show that WDT improve productivity
and safety in the workplace.
What the ILO says
Programme outcomes
Intended outcomes may include:
 programme to improve safety and security as well as to reduce
potential legal liabilities.
 Reduction of absenteeism.
Unintended outcomes may include:
 Deterioration of the work environment: fear, mistrust,
polarization between management and workers, lack of
openness, and increased social control.
 Not following legal and ethical rules.
 Breaches of confidentiality.
 Adverse effects on individuals as a result of errors in testing.
 Decrease in security of employment.
What the ILO says
Legal and ethical issues
Specific procedures
 legislation on workplace drug and alcohol testing
 labour law
 medical confidentiality laws
 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and international labour
standards
What the ILO says
Programme organization and development
 Programme policy statement
 Confidentiality
 Programme linkages
 Policy options/purposes
– investigations of accidents and incidents;
– referral for assistance;
– deterrence;
– meeting legal and regulatory requirements;
– communicating an organization's policy.
What the ILO says
Technical and scientific issues
 The working group recognizes that national and international
standards are lacking.
 Extreme caution must be exercised in the testing procedures.
 A positive result does not automatically identify an individual as
a drug user.
What the ILO says
Recommendations for action and research
 Research should be undertaken
 Evaluate the costs and benefits of WDT
 The ILO should consider the need for developing international
standards for drug and alcohol testing and laboratory
certification.
A ‘civil society’ position
The report from the Independent Inquiry on Drug Testing at
Work (IIDTW) set up at the initiative of the Joseph Rowntree
Foundation sets out and considers the arguments on drug
testing at work, and concludes with a set of detailed
recommendations.
A ‘civil society’ position









Key findings of the IIDTW
The evidence on the links was inconclusive.
Lack of evidence for a strong link between drug use and
accidents in safety-critical industries
Other factors may have a greater impact on safety, productivity
and performance
Alcohol is probably a greater cause for concern in the workplace
than illicit drugs.
There is no clear evidence that drug testing at work has a
significant deterrent effect.
Drug testing will reveal information that can have no impact on
safety, productivity or performance.
Empowering employers to investigate private behaviour actively
is in conflict with liberal-democratic values.
Legal position on drug testing at work is confused.
Costs
A ‘civil society’ position







Key recommendations of IIDWT
Legitimate in a restricted set of circumstances only:
- Illegal activities in the workplace;
- Intoxicated in work hours;
- Demonstrable impact on employees' performance
- As reasonable steps to minimize the risk of accident
- Nature of the work (e.g. police or prison service).
Need for continued research
Accreditation for providers of drug testing services is
unsatisfactory
The government should produce clear and definitive guidance
Health and welfare issue as well as a disciplinary matter
Introduced following proper consultation
Good and open management is the most effective method
How to make it ‘acceptable’?









Policy model (from British TUC’s WorkSmart)
A statement of the policy's aims, and to whom it applies.
An indication of who is responsible for carrying out the policy.
A definition of drug misuse.
Rules about how employees are expected to behave.
Safeguards making it clear that absence for treatment and
rehabilitation is covered by normal sickness absence, and
recognition that relapses may occur.
Assurance that employees with drug problems will be treated in
confidence, subject to the law.
A description of support available to employees with drug
problems, and a statement encouraging employees with drug
problems to seek help voluntarily.
A commitment to providing all employees with general
information about drugs and their impact on health and safety.
Details of the disciplinary procedures, for example stating that
possession/dealing will be automatically reported to the police.
Concluding remarks






It’s a concept that may ‘feel right’ for companies but that
has very little to actually support it
Except for alcohol, there is no standard for impairment
Companies are worried about their image. They’re afraid
that if they don’t support drug testing it implies they
support drug use
It raises justified fears about ‘big-brotherism’
When there are valid reasons for testing, clear policies
acceptable to the workers must be negotiated with the
unions
In terms of workplace alcohol and drug abuse, employee
assistance programs should be the focus rather than
testing mainly aimed at disciplinary actions.