TACOMA ALTERS DRUG-TEST POLICY PRIVACY: Decision to stop pre-employment screening stems from Seattle ruling Reversing a 10-year practice, the City of Tacoma no longer will require the majority of its employees to pass a drug test before being hired. Tacoma's sweeping change in policy means that future workers - meter readers to accountants - are not required to offer up urine samples before joining the city's 3,200-member work force. Now, only police, firefighters or those driving city vehicles with a commercial truck-driver's license will be tested, as allowed by state and federal laws governing public safety. The change, effective this week, follows a decision earlier this month in which the state Court of Appeals ruled that the City of Seattle's drug-screening for new employees was unconstitutional and a violation of privacy. The court ruling applied specifically to a Seattle city ordinance. However, the judges' decision quoted sections from the state constitution, and a number of cities throughout Washington now are reviewing or rewriting their drug-testing policies. At least one manager in Tacoma said the change means losing a valuable tool for evaluating future workers. A handful of prospective employees - - about 2 percent - fail the tests each year. "It's a tool I'd prefer to have," said Phil Knudsen, Tacoma's human resources director. In changing its policy, Tacoma officials said they wanted to reduce potential liabilities. "Part of our job in the legal department is to keep pace with court decisions and changing legislation," said chief assistant city attorney Elizabeth Pauli. "(If) our drug-testing policy is broader than what the court said, we would say, 'OK, do we want to sit back and be challenged? Or do we want to be proactive?' " In the Seattle case, the judges' decision stated: "The national scourge of drug abuse is a proper and abiding concern for government. But even in the face of such concerns, the protections of the constitution control." The American Civil Liberties Union, alleging Seattle's drug tests were invasive and an abuse of government power, filed suit in 1997 on behalf of eight city residents. King County Superior Court ruled in favor of Seattle last year, and the ACLU appealed the decision to the Court of Appeals. The City of Seattle has until Wednesday to take the case to the state Supreme Court. No decision has yet been made, but six of nine City Council members are urging the city attorney not to appeal the case. The ACLU considered the Seattle ruling a benchmark decision. "It's a very important case," said Mike Kipling, an attorney with Stokes Lawrence in Seattle. "It's the first time to my knowledge the state constitution's privacy protections have been (used) in the employment context." Kipling lauded Tacoma's change in policy, saying the city's blanket policy for drug testing was far more comprehensive than Seattle's, which had been scaled back to about half the city's employees since it was first implemented in 1996. "Seattle's policy that was struck down was a lot less troublesome than Tacoma's," he said. "Our concerns were about civil liberties throughout the state." A few hundred Tacoma employees may fall into a gray area, and in the coming weeks the city will be deciding how those jobs relate to the new court precedent, Knudsen said. There may be some question over a job classification of line utility workers, for example, where driving a city vehicle varies from one job to the next. Meanwhile, Everett, Spokane and Bellingham, which also pre-test employees, now are reconsidering or rolling back policies. Since the recent court decision, Bellingham changed its policy. Spokane's is under review, and Everett's is in the process of being changed, city officials said. The Court of Appeals decision does not apply to private-sector employment, which is not subject to the same constitutional restrictions affecting government. The ACLU will not seek to challenge private workplace drug-testing, a spokesman said.
No member comments available...
|