Straight Track Feedback #102

Post-Accident Drug & Alcohol Testing

We would like to thank Ray Lineweber of the UTU Nebraska State Legislative Board for reading and taking the time to comment on the FRA article, “Post Accident Drug & Alcohol Testing” (Straight Track 113th Edition). 

We are publishing his comments  as information and we encourage everyone to become involved. Your comments or suggestions are greatly appreciated.

Dillon Hoey
Hoey & Farina
hoey@felahfd.com
1-888-425-1212 / 312-939-1212

Editor:

A special thanks to you for printing the FRA material. That is a nice start for the federal agency, but they really need to consider the basic "due process" rights of the employee (donor).

A few examples that have been brought to FRA, by this writer, on behalf of the Nebraska State Legislative Board of the UTU, that FRA has refused to address are as follows:

1. An employee appeared to have a shy bladder and the collection container was left unattended in an open room where employer representatives testified the room was not secured. The container was used for a collection and the employee was accused of wrongdoing after a potential adulterant was found in his urine sample. The employer volunteered to reinstate the employee, but FRA wouldn't let them under the threat of fines.......why?

2. The "due process" provisions where an accused employee had the right of a laboratory person to testify at a proceeding (40.29 (n) 5 a) were stricken in the new rule. Both DOT and FRA said they weren't needed. How does a person vindicate themselves if they know they are right and there is the potential for laboratory error as has been found in the last year or so. The high-powered laboratory owners, continue to own the agencies, and those at the agencies don't have the courage to do the right things.

3. Why does FRA continue to allow the employers to use the employees as guineas after incidents where the employee clearly did not contribute to the incident. Not only do the employers test the employee, they demoralize them by having them come back and finish the tour of duty. Lamar Allen and George Gavalla told UTU nearly 2 years ago they would stop that. I can't tell folks they lied to us, as they didn't say when would stop it. 

4. A Federal random drug test was conducted last year on an employee and the sample was not split. Lamars "rule" says that is okay, but the Federal Regulations require a split under all Federal Collections. Lamar played executioner, and the employee remains fired.

Yes, Lamar is in charge of the FRA Drug Testing, but his credibility is on loan to others. The only way to regain that, for him, is to follow the regulation.

Thanks again for your efforts!

Ray Lineweber

/end/

[top]