Drugs in the Workplace Committee
Model Substance Abuse Policy

Introduction

In September of 1987, Maryland Governor William Donald Schaefer appointed Chief Cornelius J. Behan, Baltimore County Police Department, and Bernard C. Trueschler, chairman of the board, Baltimore Gas and Electric Company, as co-chairs of a committee to address the problem of drug abuse in the workplace in Maryland. The committee was composed of members whose individual backgrounds and experiences included the judiciary, the legislature, law enforcement and criminology, education, public and private sector management, union representation, and citizen advocacy.

In an October 21, 1987, letter to the Drugs in the Workplace Committee, Governor Schaefer defined the committee's mission:

I look to this Committee, therefore, to devise a strategy that will serve to induce each and every employer in Maryland to develop, articulate, and implement a drug abuse policy tailored to the needs of the company and its employees.

To assist the business community to develop such policies, the Committee should strive for an action plan that will provide employer- employee groups with a wide range of options that recognize the unique nature and needs of the many and varied businesses that make up our State's commercial community. Through such a product, the committee could identify the critical issues, policies and programs that are indispensable to the resolution of drug and alcohol abuse in the workplace.

The committee intends this report to serve as phase one in its response to its mission. It consists of a model substance abuse policy and suggested options that could be used in its implementation.

Action on Governor Schaefer's charge was initiated by having committee staff and consultants gather data associated with drug use in the workplace. Significant findings included:

1. The type and extent of substance abuse in a community tend to be reflected in the workplace.
2. Substance abusing employees are less productive, abuse benefits, cause health care to rise, are a danger to themselves and others, and encourage criminal activity.
3. Written drug policies and employee assistance programs (EAPs) are most often found in large companies that have a full-time personnel staff and a permanent and relatively stable labor force. However, most companies have fewer than 100 employees and have no written policies or EAPs.

The committee felt that a model policy statement could be devised that, with minor modifications, would fit the needs of any employer, regardless of the size of the company. This model substance abuse policy would contain a mission statement, define the substances covered, identify the responsibility of the company and its employees, be signed by the top company official and be provided to each employee, and would apply to all levels of personnel. It would serve as the first step of a strategy designed to induce every employer to adopt and implement a substance abuse policy.

The committee agreed that a substance abuse program must consider the specific needs, structure, and resources of a company. Since no two companies are totally alike with regard to needs, structure, and resources, no single substance abuse program could be devised that would serve as a universal model. However, broad guidelines could be prepared that could serve to assist employers in developing a tailored substance abuse program.

Substance Abuse Policy

After extensive review and deliberation, the committee adopted the Model Substance Abuse Policy statement.

Program Options

In order to implement a substance abuse program based upon the above model policy statement, a company must decide what program options it wants to offer. Suitable options, and the possible features they might contain, are included for consideration. To facilitate their review, the option features are synopsized.

Prevention and Education

1. Inform management of the nature, extent, and consequence of substance abuse within the work force and the prospective work force market, even if specific acts do not manifest themselves, thereby obtaining a commitment to work towards a drug free workplace.
2. Disseminate to all managers, employees, and prospective employees, the company's written policy on substance abuse through the usual route of personnel communications.
3. Provide employees, with the aid of employee groups if appropriate, accurate information on the legal, physical, and psychological consequences of on-the-job and off-the-job substance abuse.
4. Train all supervisors and, where appropriate, representatives of employee groups, about drugs and paraphernalia, signs and symptoms of substance abuse, and performance deterioration signals, which aids them in implementing the company's substance abuse policy.
5. Provide a list of public and private resources available to managers and employees that will assist them in addressing their substance abuse prevention, intervention, and treatment needs.

Enforcement and Performance Drug Testing

1. Each employer should consider the value of pre-employment drug testing for all appropriate applicants. Obviously such pre-employment testing must be within the boundaries of existing law, economically feasible for the employer, and based upon a careful analysis of the positions for which testing is required.
2. Each employer should consider the value of "for cause" drug testing and testing that is provided within a treatment program. Employers should, when there are clear indications of performance problems that are related to drug use, require that individuals submit to an established testing protocol. Similarly, individuals enrolled in treatment programs may be required to submit to drug testing.
3. Employers should require random testing for all employees in appropriately designated sensitive positions.
4. Employers should require random testing during any routinely required physical examination.
5. Any drug testing must be carried out in compliance with carefully developed, comprehensive testing protocols that have been reviewed by and disseminated to all employees. The committee has reviewed various protocols and recommends that employers consider the drug testing standards contained in Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Drug Testing Programs.

Detecting Substance Abuse

1. All managers and supervisors should be trained to identify job performance problems that may be caused by substance abuse, and to be aware of the appropriate response to such employees.
2. Employers should consider establishing some method that would enable employees to confidentially or anonymously report any drug supplier in the workplace. Obviously, the method must be used with full respect for the rights of all parties concerned. Information received through this method should be thoroughly and completely investigated before any action is taken by the employer.

The Role of Law Enforcement Agencies

1. Employers should meet with appropriate local government agencies (e.g., law enforcement agency, office of alcohol and drug abuse coordination, etc.) to establish an agreement concerning the role each will play in responding to drug abuse in the workplace. Such an agreement usually should begin with an assessment of the situation. An effort should be made to determine the knowledge and understanding the employer, key managers, and line supervisors have regarding drugs in the workplace. If training is required, basic training may be provided to supervisors and managers.
2. In emergency situations, such as when the sale or use of illegal drugs is observed, local law enforcement should be contacted using the appropriate emergency phone number. The employer should, as with any emergency situation, be able to describe the activity observed, identify involved persons and witnesses, etc.
3. If an employer suspects specific substance abuse acts are occurring within the workplace but has no direct knowledge of such activity, local law enforcement should be contacted to discuss what kind of investigation is most appropriate.
4. Employers should understand that when assistance is requested from local law enforcement and a criminal proceeding is subsequently initiated, they will be expected to support the criminal proceeding by testifying, providing paid release time for others to testify, etc.

Rehabilitation

1. Companies should consider implementing employee assistance programs (EAPs) because these programs have a positive impact on people with problems, facilitate positive management/labor relations, encourage problem resolution, maintain an employee's dignity and confidentiality, and provide a return on the company's investment.
2. An EAP should be open to all employees on a self or supervisory referred basis for the purpose of information, advice, referral, or counseling. The purpose of counseling in the EAP is to assist employees with problems which impact adversely upon work performance or conduct. When these problems are effectively confronted and treated, the employees are expected to become healthier, better adjusted individuals and are likely to perform more productively in their jobs.
3. Supervisors and other appropriate management and union personnel should be trained in recognizing employees with problems and how to utilize the EAP.
4. Except for limitations on sensitive positions, no employee's job security or promotion opportunity should be jeopardized by a request for counseling or outside referral assistance from the EAP in connection with alcohol, drug abuse, or emotional problems.
5. An EAP should operate under a clearly defined policy which outlines the purpose of the EAP, organizational and legal mandates, employees' eligibility, roles and responsibilities of various personnel in the organization, and procedures for program use.
6. A company should review its health benefits package for the purpose of determining adequacy of coverage for alcohol and drug abuse problems.