Reasonable-Suspicion Testing: The Flip-Side of the Equation


The USDOT requires reasonable-suspicion testing for all modes when specific, contemporaneous and articulable observations are made by a trained company official concerning (among other things) the speech, appearance, and actions of an employee related to drug use or alcohol misuse.
There is a common misconception that substance-specific symptoms must be observed in order to make a determination to test. For example, rapid eye movement, excitability, and increased pulse rate are clearly associated with the effects of stimulants like cocaine and amphetamines. However, the company official who makes the observations may be witnessing the employee during the after-effects caused by the drug. During this “come-down” period, employees may present symptoms of extreme fatigue, lethargy, and slowed responses and reaction times. In other words, they experience the opposite of the symptoms associated with the initial effects of the drug.
Supervisors and company officials trained in recognizing the signs and symptoms of drug use and alcohol misuse should always consider the after-effects of the drug categories when making evaluations. A study of reasonable suspicion tests conducted in 2016 showed that many of the tests ordered which resulted in positive results for cocaine and amphetamines were ordered based on observations of symptoms associated with the after-effects of these drugs: the “low” and not the “high”.
Understanding these symptom cycles allows employers to more accurately and confidently evaluate employees.
Smart Test Boston
240 Commercial St. Boston MA 02109

Location: 240 Commercial St., FL 3, Boston, MA 02109, United States

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Patrice Kelly named Director of ODAPC

Patrice Kelly, former Acting Director of the Drug of Alcohol Policy and Compliance (ODAPC) has been named Director of ODAPC . Her directorship comes at the best-possible time for public safety, as the USDOT plans to allow for the testing of an expanded opioid panel in the current five panel tests currently mandated. Under her role as Acting Director, ODAPC increased public outreach, fostered safety program improvements in industry, and was central in guiding all DOT modes through the changing state laws regarding cannabis and the opioid crisis. The industry can expect Director Kelly and her team at ODAPC to continue to provide guidance and clarification to transportation safety in a rapidly changing landscape, and to lead a safety program which directly impacts the US roads, skies, waterways, and pipelines. Smart Test 240 Commercial St. Boston MA 02109
Read more

DNA Testing In Boston

Image
The rise of affordability on DNA testing has allowed for substantial increases in its applicability.  From DNA testing for US Immigration to testing for ancestry research and maternity/paternity cases, the biggest obstacles to testing are the cost of the test, the reliability and defensibility of the results, and the timeframe to receive results. Following testing protocols without error at the time of collection are required for a specimen to be valid and defensible, and a laboratory which can provide fast-yet-accurate results. Popular DNA testing services for ancestry can take up to eight weeks and paternity tests can take several weeks. Smart Test provides affordable testing with legally valid results in under a week. DNA testing in Boston is now faster, more accurate, secure and confidential at an affordable price. Smart Test Boston (617) 963–8378 240 Commercial St. Boston, MA 02109
Read more

Oral Fluids Testing — Current Barriers to USDOT Approval

Image
Oral Fluids Testing — Current Barriers to USDOT Approval Oral fluids testing offered by several national drug testing labs ( Quest , Alere , and Omega for example) provides a new method for the detection of metabolites for drug testing, but is not currently approved for use by the USDOT. One barrier that currently exists is that the USDOT requires the ability to split each specimen. Two oral fluid testing devices would be considered two separate specimens in the eyes of the DOT, and therefor unacceptable. One clear solution is for the collection swab to be split into two pieces and be deposited into two vials, just like a urine specimen. For this to work, it must be built into the device, as manually cutting the swab would risk contamination. Another problem faced by the labs is in the collection process itself. The current methods mostly involve the employee (or “donor”) handling the specimen collection device and to place the swab into the vials, with the collector...
Read more