CITY DRUG POLICY CHANGE PROPOSED

Workers Would Get Second Chance After Positive Test

City employees caught under the influence of drugs or alcohol at work will
get a second chance at saving their jobs if an amendment passed by a
council committee gets full council approval.

The city's Committee on City Employees approved the amendment to a new
proposed drug policy in a 5-1 vote Thursday, with council member Ditty
Markham voting against the second chance.

City employees elected to the committee by their coworkers also were at the
meeting, but they do not have voting powers.

The new policy previously had a one-strike-and-you're-out clause that would
immediately dismiss any worker whose random test came back positive.

The amendment, proposed by council member Dave Molgaard, now gives "a very
small window of opportunity" to those who want to keep their jobs after a
test comes back positive, Molgaard said.

Within 48 hours of the positive test results, employees would be suspended
without pay and would have to waive all rights to grievances or other hearings.

They would then report to a substance abuse professional and agree to a
treatment plan formed by the counselor, usually a 30-day outpatient program.

The employee would have to pay for his or her own treatment without any
claims to the city's health care benefits. Once the counselor approved the
employee to go back to work, he or she would be tested at least six times
during the first year, and could be tested at any time. The employee would
also give permission to release evaluation information from the counselor
to the city.

After returning to work, the employee would be fired if he or she had
another positive test at any time, or if the worker didn't follow the
counseling procedure exactly.

Molgaard said the amendment was needed for several reasons.

Marijuana, for example, stays in the system long after a person is high, so
employees could produce positive test results for "taking a hit off a joint
on a fishing trip."

"The city has no business firing you for doing something on your own time
that didn't affect your work," Molgaard said. "People do stupid things. I
don't think we should destroy lives for it."

Molgaard said the second-chance policy could act as a wake-up call to
serious addicts and alcoholics, forcing them to make a choice between drugs
and their job.

Others worried, however, that the second chance wouldn't actually help many
people.

"The rate of recidivism is so high," Markham said. "In areas of high
security I really don't think you can risk a second chance."

Some council members thought the city would benefit from giving a second
chance to people in high-security positions, like uniformed police and fire
employees. Because the city pays for training and testing, they felt it
wasn't smart to fire a uniformed employee and essentially throw away the
investment because of one positive test.

Molgaard said he thought this new amendment could help solve at least some
employees' drug and alcohol abuse problems.

"We're not going to catch everybody, but for those one or two addicts, it
could act as a wake-up call," he said.

The new policy, which was passed with the one-strike rule by the rules and
ordinances committee, will need the approval of City Council, which meets
Monday.

If passed, the policy would require computer-selected random testing of all
safety sensitive employees -- more than 800 of the city's estimated 900
workers. Safety sensitive employees are defined as anyone who works at
heights, drives city vehicles, operates with a commercial driver's license,
handles chemicals or performs any other safety task. The only people who
wouldn't be subject to the testing would be secretaries and desk workers
who didn't drive city cars.

"Any employee in the city of Charleston right now, they have been warned
they're going to get this drug testing," said council member Betty Morton.
"If they were concerned about their job, they'd get help."

Writer Deanna Wrenn can be reached at 348-1796.