Contractors must now factor mandatory drug and alcohol testing requirements into any new tenders submitted for State Government projects, where a Workplace Relations Management Plan (WRMP) applies. Details of the new requirements were released in June.

Over the past five months, Master Builders has listened to the views of those opposed to the idea of drug and alcohol testing and has engaged extensively with members, OHS professionals, unions and other industry associations, counsellors, service providers and workers on the issue.

Here is a list of the six most common arguments against drug and alcohol testing that we have encountered, and how we suggest head contractors when instituting their drug and alcohol testing policies respond.

1.       “What about the politicians and the bosses? It’s just the government picking on us workers again.”

This is the most commonly expressed negative reaction to the decision to mandate drug and alcohol testing. It is not an argument against testing but more about whether the government’s decision to mandate testing is unfair to construction workers performing work in a high risk environment.

The reality is that the testing requirements apply to all persons engaged on a project. That is, all persons working on or attending the project site must be eligible to be tested, including construction workers and site office workers.

2.       “You can’t test for impairment.”

There is an undisputable, direct correlation between alcohol breath testing and impairment. Where a person tests positive for drugs, however, the testing cannot determine exactly when the drugs were consumed or whether the person that has tested positive is still affected by them.

No one can reasonably argue that illicit drugs do not cause a person to be impaired. It is known that people take drugs to ‘get high’ or go on a ‘trip’. No one can reasonably argue that the various types of drugs that are to be tested for do not have psychogenic, psychoactive or hallucinogenic effects.

Oral swipe saliva testing is regarded as being capable of identifying whether a person has consumed an illicit substance (e.g. marijuana) within a shorter period of time (e.g. within six hours prior to testing) because of the concentration levels in a person’s system. Principal contractors and subcontractors are not required to differentiate between whether the person that has tested positive took the drugs last night, last week or last month; nor are they required to demonstrate impairment. The expectation is that a positive test will necessitate a decision in favour of safety which will be to remove the person from the site until they can provide a negative test.

3.       “What business is it of yours if I smoked a joint at a party two weeks ago? You are invading my privacy.”

Drug and alcohol testing has not been introduced as a means to invade workers privacy or to stop them from doing things that are illegal. Drug and alcohol testing has been introduced to ensure that worker’s are safe on site and that fellow workers are not put at risk because someone is under the influence of drugs or alcohol.

4.       “You’re only doing drug testing to sack workers!”

Drug and alcohol policies should always be oriented towards counselling and support. Disciplinary action will be part of the process but it will not be the first step in the process. In addition, testing requirements apply to all persons engaged on a project, including construction workers and site management.

5.       “What about privacy? If I test positive everyone will know because I will be removed from the workplace and I will be labelled a drug addict.”

Employers are entitled to do drug and alcohol testing. It is not a new phenomenon and has been in place in the rail, aviation, civil, road transport and mining sectors for years. Employers will have to consult with their employees, and part of the process will include giving employees the opportunity to come forward to seek assistance well before on site testing commences. This is also one of the reasons why there is a focus on random testing, as well as the option of voluntary testing.

While disclosure of test results will be subject to strict privacy guidelines, there is one failsafe solution for those concerned about the ramifications for testing positive: Don’t do drugs!

6.       “There is no evidence that anyone is taking drugs in the construction industry.”

On the day that mandatory testing was announced, CFMEU safety manager, Dr Gerry Ayres, conceded that the most recent research had indicated that two per cent of workers attend the workplace under the influence of drugs or alcohol and that construction workers were no different. For more, listen to the radio interview at the end of this article.

There are known fatalities that have occurred in construction where drugs or alcohol have been a factor. One fatality is one too many.

The CFMEU argue that there is no evidence to support testing and the reason why workers take drugs or consume too much alcohol is because of ‘insidious hours, fatigue and programming’. For more, listen to the radio interview at the end of this article.

These arguments are a distraction from genuine safety concerns, and are manifestly wrong coming from a union that constantly talks a good game about how important safety is.

Ultimately, if anyone is concerned about being tested and turning up with a positive test result, therefore posing a potential risk to safety, livelihood and reputation, the message that employers must convey when introducing their policies is quite simple: “Don’t do drugs!”

CFMEU Safety Manager Gerry Ayres on Drug and Alcohol Testing – 3AW evenings – 26 February 2014