Transit commission approves drug testing
TORONTO (Canadian OH&S News) -- New rules drafted by Toronto Transit Commission (TTC) staff and unveiled on September 12 would see some workers submit to a range of drug and alcohol tests.
But the most controversial aspect of the policy — random marijuana drug testing — was rejected by the TTC's board, which is made up of city councillors, following a meeting on September 18. The policy will take effect in one year.
The staff report comes in the wake of a fatal accident last year where a rail car operator found to have "measurable levels" of the active chemical in marijuana in his system was killed and two other workers were injured (COHSN, June 23, 2008). The report mentions that there have been 39 incidents of impairment among TTC employees since 2006, with four incidents involving "operators found to be under the influence of alcohol while in revenue operation" in 2008.
The accident on April 23, 2007 involved Antonio Almeida, 38, who was operating three connected flatbed maintenance cars in the early morning when a metal platform — extending from the side of one of the cars — slammed into a subway tunnel wall. The platform, which weighed as much as a small car, was forced into the air and struck the operating cab where Almeida was located. A TTC report later confirmed that Almeida had used drugs during his overnight shift, although it was not a root cause of the accident.
As a result of what they see as a "continuing, if not increasing trend in the number of alcohol and drug related incidents," members of the TTC staff have recommended that the commission put in place the new 'Fitness for Duty Policy.'
Under these rules, workers would face testing under five circumstances: if there is reasonable cause for suspicion of impairment; after accidents; following earlier violations of the policy; following drug/alcohol treatment under the policy; and, when applying for a new position.
These tests would be conducted on all workers deemed to be in "safety sensitive positions," which includes bus, streetcar and subway operators, and selected management and executive positions.
Random checks are needed, TTC argues
Brad Ross, director of communications for the commission, argues that the random checks would have served a dual purpose: they act as a deterrent to drug and alcohol impairment on the job, and they give management "a better sense of anybody who may be impaired on the job." He points out that given the nature of the TTC's service, many operators "report to work… [and] pick up a bus on the street, and so may not necessarily encounter a supervisor throughout their entire shift," making random tests essential.
In an effort to allay privacy concerns, Ross emphasizes that the TTC is only concerned with impairment on the job, and they are "not looking at what somebody does on their own time away from the workplace."
During the September 18 meeting, Joe Mihevc, a city councillor and vice-chair of the TTC, put forward the motion to reject random drug testing, Ross says. Before the meeting, Mihevc had told COHSN that he agrees with staff on testing in the five situations, but that "the random one is where I've got difficulty." Mihevc calls for giving workers "the benefit of the doubt" until that trust has been violated — at which point he would support testing. He also points out that random drug and alcohol testing is "not court tested" in Canada, and could have ended up costing the TTC hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees for "a policy that basically says at the end of the day that we don't trust our employees."
City councillor Glenn De Baeremaeker, also a member of the TTC board, broadly agrees with the policy but was also concerned about random testing. However, he supports the assistance portion of the policy, saying that it's better to proactively seek out and help employees than to drive them "underground," where their problems may go unnoticed.
At the September 18 commission meeting, Bob Kinnear, the president of the union that represents over 9,000 transit workers, strongly opposed the random drug testing, calling it "degrading to workers."
But the most controversial aspect of the policy — random marijuana drug testing — was rejected by the TTC's board, which is made up of city councillors, following a meeting on September 18. The policy will take effect in one year.
The staff report comes in the wake of a fatal accident last year where a rail car operator found to have "measurable levels" of the active chemical in marijuana in his system was killed and two other workers were injured (COHSN, June 23, 2008). The report mentions that there have been 39 incidents of impairment among TTC employees since 2006, with four incidents involving "operators found to be under the influence of alcohol while in revenue operation" in 2008.
The accident on April 23, 2007 involved Antonio Almeida, 38, who was operating three connected flatbed maintenance cars in the early morning when a metal platform — extending from the side of one of the cars — slammed into a subway tunnel wall. The platform, which weighed as much as a small car, was forced into the air and struck the operating cab where Almeida was located. A TTC report later confirmed that Almeida had used drugs during his overnight shift, although it was not a root cause of the accident.
As a result of what they see as a "continuing, if not increasing trend in the number of alcohol and drug related incidents," members of the TTC staff have recommended that the commission put in place the new 'Fitness for Duty Policy.'
Under these rules, workers would face testing under five circumstances: if there is reasonable cause for suspicion of impairment; after accidents; following earlier violations of the policy; following drug/alcohol treatment under the policy; and, when applying for a new position.
These tests would be conducted on all workers deemed to be in "safety sensitive positions," which includes bus, streetcar and subway operators, and selected management and executive positions.
Random checks are needed, TTC argues
Brad Ross, director of communications for the commission, argues that the random checks would have served a dual purpose: they act as a deterrent to drug and alcohol impairment on the job, and they give management "a better sense of anybody who may be impaired on the job." He points out that given the nature of the TTC's service, many operators "report to work… [and] pick up a bus on the street, and so may not necessarily encounter a supervisor throughout their entire shift," making random tests essential.
In an effort to allay privacy concerns, Ross emphasizes that the TTC is only concerned with impairment on the job, and they are "not looking at what somebody does on their own time away from the workplace."
During the September 18 meeting, Joe Mihevc, a city councillor and vice-chair of the TTC, put forward the motion to reject random drug testing, Ross says. Before the meeting, Mihevc had told COHSN that he agrees with staff on testing in the five situations, but that "the random one is where I've got difficulty." Mihevc calls for giving workers "the benefit of the doubt" until that trust has been violated — at which point he would support testing. He also points out that random drug and alcohol testing is "not court tested" in Canada, and could have ended up costing the TTC hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees for "a policy that basically says at the end of the day that we don't trust our employees."
City councillor Glenn De Baeremaeker, also a member of the TTC board, broadly agrees with the policy but was also concerned about random testing. However, he supports the assistance portion of the policy, saying that it's better to proactively seek out and help employees than to drive them "underground," where their problems may go unnoticed.
At the September 18 commission meeting, Bob Kinnear, the president of the union that represents over 9,000 transit workers, strongly opposed the random drug testing, calling it "degrading to workers."