Thursday, August 19, 2010

Tip of the Month: Drug Testing and the Temp

Consider the following:

  • The cost of alcohol and drug abuse in our society is $237 billion annually
  • About 75% of all illicit drug users in the U.S. are employed
These two points alone form a basis for you and your staffing supplier to support Drug Free Workplace initiatives.
As part of our Drug Free Workplace Policy we require post accident drug testing. Several times each year we experience positive post accident test results. This will form the grounds in most of these cases for our rejection of the claim.

Some of the hoops we must go through to successfully defend a positive drug test claim are the result of the Ohio Supreme Court ruling involving the burden of proof and probable cause. Because we have no presence at the work site, as a third party labor supplier it is not in our reach to claim probable cause for the purpose of forcing the post accident drug test. As a result we must accept the burden of proof.

As part of this process we first need to make sure the test is done in a timely manner. Those employees with test concerns will use all sorts of tricks to avoid a timely test. They will tell the hospital that our client is their employer not Ryan Staffing so our protocol is not administered. They will not report the injury as work related or they will put off treatment for 48 hours or longer.

Once we have a timely test result we analyze the mechanism injury and the likelihood the drug test result caused the accident. In rare cases the accident could have occurred regardless of the employee’s intoxication.

We make certain that an MRO (Medical Review Officer) has reviewed the results with the claimant and are satisfied that prescription drugs or other legitimate reasons are not the cause of the positive test.

When we have all of our ducks lined up we enforce our zero tolerance policy and terminate the employee. Every step of this process is thoroughly documented for the inevitable need at the legal proceedings to come. We have pending claims where the individual has already filed for unemployment and welfare before the Workers Compensation hearing has even been held, so the need for documentation extends beyond the WC claim.

Because the burden of proof is on us for the reasons already discussed we next have the entire file reviewed by our Medical Expert to determine if the positive drug test was the direct and proximate cause of the accident.

If our suspicions are confirmed the claim is rejected and the matter is turned over to our attorney to present our legal argument at hearing before the Industrial Commission and beyond.

With most of these cases, the individual involved does a disappearing act and is never heard from again. We have had a few of these claims appealed to court only to get settled for nuisance value. The one positive drug test claim that we lost was due to the fact that the Hearing Officer determined that the accident/injury would have happened regardless of the drug influence. (another person dropped a bar on the claimants foot)

Supporting your staffing supplier challenge to positive drug test Workers Compensation claims is very important to your bottom line. The most important reason for doing this is that you do not want these people working in your facility along side your own employees.

What you can do to assist your supplier is make sure the injured person is drug tested when they receive treatment. Always notify the supplier immediately about the injury… time is of the essence. Support their Drug Free Workplace Policies and encourage random drug testing at your workplace.

It has been our experience that random drug testing is a much more effective deterrent than pre employment drug testing alone to weed out the users. Often times the users apply “clean” and resume abuse after they start working. With random testing they are always aware of the possibility of getting caught. And along with getting caught comes getting fired and the possibility of losing their welfare and unemployment benefits.

The cost of substance and alcohol abuse in the workplace can be staggering. Over the next few months the “Corner Stool” will show you how.

Sunday, August 15, 2010

Tim's Talking About Co-Employment Issues, Drug Free Workplace and Department of Labor

AREA TEMPS FINDS IT COSTLY TO DISCRIMINATE FOR CLIENTS

If you follow our e-letter at all over the months you know we encourage all of our clients to not lose sight of co-employments issues.

Recently Area Temps, a Cleveland based staffing supplier settled a discrimination lawsuit to the tune of $650,000.

Area Temps was accused by the EEOC of complying with client request for workers based on such things as race, gender, national origin etc. They also fired two of their internal staff for not going along with the discriminatory practices and one individual for cooperating with the EEOC.

While the settlement involving Area Temps has obviously been made public, we can only assume their clients involved were probably impacted by the case as well.

The bottom line is that you should never believe that just because a “temp” is not your employee that you are exempt from those employment laws that cover everyone in the workplace.

WHY WE SUPPORT THE DRUG FREE WORKPLACE – PART 1

Consider these facts:

One worker in four between the ages of 18 to 34 used drugs in the past year.
One worker in three knows about drug sales in the workplace.

In the workplace these problems obviously become your problems whether they are your employees or that of a third party supplier. They increase the risk of accidents, lower productivity, raise insurance costs and lower profits.

Substance abusers are responsible for 40% of all industrial fatalities.
And think about this one:
23 million use marijuana at least four times a week; 18 million abuse alcohol; 6 million regularly use cocaine and 2 million use heroin.

Next issue we’ll talk about what to look for in suspecting drug or alcohol abuse in the workplace.


FOOD FOR THOUGHT

For those of you that think your staffing supplier has it easy when it comes to Workers Compensation, here is where Ryan Staffing is at through July 31, 2010:

First report of injury filed:
Claims allowed - 32
Claims dis-allowed - 6
Claims withdrawn - 3
Claims rejected - 4
_______________
                         45

Due to our internal transitional work program only one claim has resulted in lost time away from work.

We are still operating without a TPA, and while this might seem challenging enough, in 1999 we had 235 claims including 18 with compensable lost time.



WE’RE NOT BAD PEOPLE

Last month we ran our contest around the LeBron escape from Cleveland and we took a bit of flack for it.

We surely did not mean to offend anyone with our anti-LeBron survey and we really aren’t hate mongers. That being said, we haven’t changed our mind about his leaving.

As one who has been going to Cavs games since 1970 and the Cincinnati Royals before that, my loyalties run deep. That along with the fun others had with survey made us all feel better here at Ryan Staffing. Some of the results/ comments from the survey included:


THIS MONTH IT’S TIME TO MOVE ON TO THE BROWNS

Our survey question involves your best guess on how many games the Brownies win this season. Take the test and win a chance to see the Browns home opener against the KC Chiefs on September 19, 2010.


YOU KNOW LIFE ISN’T GETTING EASIER WHEN. . . .

The Department of Labor recently decided that employers under the FLSA must pay employees for time spent putting on and taking off personal protective equipment. This interpretation also includes time spent putting on and taking off work clothes. While this ruling was made in the context of collective bargaining agreements, its implications extend to non –union situations as well.

I, for one, am elated that my spouse is in “management” at Ryan Staffing because if we had to pay her to get dressed and undressed to come to work we’d be broke, just kidding!


MIA NLRB NOT MISSED

The US Supreme Court recently said that 600 decisions made by the National Labor Relations Board that was operating with only 2 members (3unfilled seats) for over two years are without statutory authority.
Is it just me or don’t you find it amazing that life went on just fine without anyone really missing 60% of the board? Can we take from this that about 60% of all Government Bureaucrats really wouldn’t be missed – interesting.