7thCir: City justified in requiring random, suspicionless drug testing of truck driver
Drug testing of newly hired employees has become a pervasive part of today’s employment scene. Moreover, many employees in safety sensitive positions are subject to random drug testing, and are also likely to be subject to drug testing in the event of an accident, whether or not they are apparently at fault. Now a decision of the Seventh Circuit has determined that a public employee could be subjected to random drug testing without violating his due process rights or Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches, even though he did not hold a "safety sensitive position" as defined by the parties’ bargaining agreement (Krieg v Seybold, 7thCir, March 21, 2007, 154 LC ¶60,379).
Drug testing of newly hired employees has become a pervasive part of today’s employment scene. Moreover, many employees in safety sensitive positions are subject to random drug testing, and are also likely to be subject to drug testing in the event of an accident, whether or not they are apparently at fault. Now a decision of the Seventh Circuit has determined that a public employee could be subjected to random drug testing without violating his due process rights or Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches, even though he did not hold a "safety sensitive position" as defined by the parties’ bargaining agreement (Krieg v Seybold, 7thCir, March 21, 2007, 154 LC ¶60,379).
posted by David @ 11:50 AM
