Drug Testing Upheld in Alberta Court

General maritime and engineering discussion occurs on this board. Feel free to post newsbits, comments, ask questions about maritime matters and post your opinions.
User avatar
Enduring Contributor
Posts: 2802
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2007 2:29 am
Currently located: East Coast, Canada

Drug Testing Upheld in Alberta Court

Postby JK » Sat Jan 05, 2008 7:15 am

While this may be the construction industry, it is interesting to take note of. Will it follow thru into the marine industry?
IMO, yes.

Alberta Court of Appeal ruling upholds construction workplace drug testing
02/01/2008 7:27:00 PM

EDMONTON - Construction and energy companies are happy with an Alberta court ruling that upholds the right of employers to test workers in safety-sensitive jobs for drugs.

The Alberta Court of Appeal's decision overturned a lower court judgment that said Kellogg, Brown & Root Co. discriminated against a man in 2002 when it fired him from an oilsands project near Fort McMurray after he tested positive for marijuana.

John Chiasson, who admitted to being a recreational pot smoker, filed a complaint with the Alberta Human Rights Commission, which ruled against him. The commission said there needs to be a balance between an individual's human rights and the needs of an employer in protecting others.

But Court of Queen's Bench Justice Sheilah Martin then ruled in his favour. She said he should have been treated the same as someone with a drug addiction, which is considered a disability in human rights case law.

The panel of three Appeal Court justices disagreed. The judges said it is legitimate for Kellogg, Brown & Root to presume that people who use drugs at all are a safety risk in an already dangerous workplace.

"We see this case as no different than that of a trucking or taxi company which has a policy requiring its employees to refrain from the use of alcohol for some time before the employee drives one of the employer's vehicles," the justices wrote.

"Extending human rights protections to situations resulting in placing the lives of others at risk flies in the face of logic."

Kellogg, Brown & Root, one of the largest construction firms in the world, was helping to build an expansion to Syncrude Canada's plant at the time of Chiasson's case and is still active in the oilsands.

Andrew Robertson, a lawyer for the company, said the Appeal Court's decision is important to energy and construction industries.

"It is refreshing to see the Alberta Court of Appeal factor in risk management in safety-sensitive workplaces in a circumstance when there had been a recent focus on human rights issues," he said.

Heather Browne, a spokeswoman for Texas-based Kellogg, Brown & Root, hailed the ruling.

"KBR is a leader in workplace safety, and maintaining that commitment is the company's top priority," Browne said Wednesday.

"The court ruling upholds that commitment and we look forward to continuing our work in that regard."

Robertson noted that the Alberta appeal justices did not follow an Ontario Court of Appeal's decision in a similar case that said employees who test positive for drugs are to be dealt with as if they have an addiction even if they don't.

He said courts in provinces outside of Alberta and Ontario hearing similar cases will now have two different precedents to refer to.

Commission lawyer Janice Ashcroft said the Court of Appeal ruling will be reviewed before determining whether to seek leave to have the case heard by the Supreme Court of Canada.

"It is important to employers and employees to clarify what is the role of human rights when it comes to drug testing," Ashcroft said.

"This affects a lot of people and it is important. The commission does have a duty to ensure that the rights of all Albertans - both employers and employees - are balanced in this respect."

During the original court case, officials with oilsands giant Syncrude testified that the company's lost-time rate from accidents has dropped in part because of drug and alcohol testing.

Syncrude, Suncor, Albian Sands and other major oilsands heavyweights test their employees for drugs before they are allowed on jobsites.

Kara Flynn, a spokeswoman for Syncrude, said that in a broad sense, the Appeal Court ruling supports the company's drug-testing policy and goals.

"Any judicial decisions that support that are greatly appreciated," she said.

The impact of the ruling is already starting to ripple beyond Alberta's boundaries.

Phil Hochstein, president of the Independent Contractors and Business Association in British Columbia, said while workplace drug testing is common on major projects in Alberta, it is the exception in B.C.

He expects that is going to change.

"I think that workplace testing of construction workers is probably an issue whose time has come," he said from Vancouver.

"I think this case is going to spur more of this jobsite testing, not only on big industrial jobs, but on commercial and institutional jobs throughout the country."

User avatar
Officer of the Watch
Posts: 122
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 8:48 am
Currently located: Albuquerque New Mexico


Postby TxMarEng » Sat Jan 05, 2008 10:31 am

Hopefully it will apply to all Transport workers. Even here in the US where it is "supposedly" enforced there are many who slip through the cracks. Drugs have no place at sea or ashore.

Officer of the Watch
Posts: 112
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2007 12:12 am
Currently located: Victoria

Drug Testing

Postby Wyatt » Tue Apr 29, 2008 5:54 pm

The problem with the existing drug tests is that they do nothing to test whether the subject or worker was intoxicated at the time of the test. The drug test will cover up to a month of the persons past and tell whether he/she were intoxicated in that time frame. Do you feel it is important to delve into everyones past especially during their time off, and not attempt to judge people on thier ability to do thier job on your time while they are under the employ of the company. It is a very slippery slope when one dictates to everyone on what you are to be doing when you are off the job site. Is religious beliefs going to be the next requirement?

User avatar
Engineering Mentor
Posts: 124
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2007 8:02 am
Currently located: Ireland

Postby ArkSeaJumper » Wed Apr 30, 2008 12:17 am

It is a fine line,

The system here is everyone on a vessel is tested on arrival in port, if the tester arrives 30 minutes after the vessel has arrived, nobody is tested.

Nobody that I have heard of has tested the decision makers in the office yet!!

Officer of the Watch
Posts: 112
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2007 12:12 am
Currently located: Victoria

Postby Wyatt » Wed Apr 30, 2008 7:14 am

The company I work with uses the drug tests as a form of convienience to access work with oil companies. No one else in the company gets tested, just the ships crews. No shore based personel or management gets tested. It is also a liability issue, if the company can prove that someone tests positive, then they can blame this individual for the accident and shifts the liability to him/her. The people most affected with drug tests are the cooks, pot use, and some deckhands. What these people have to do with safety sensitive jobs I am not sure.

Return to “Crew Mess”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests