BOON OR BUST, DRUG TEST USE IS ON THE RISE

Before you start working at Kelly-Springfield Tire Co., you have to take a
drug test.

For more than a decade, Kelly-Springfield has tested its new employees for
drug use, said spokesman Richard Evans.

Kelly-Springfield employs about 3,600 people at its plant on the north side
of Fayetteville.

Drug tests can protect companies and protect their employees' lives, but
some say they can infringe on the employees' right to privacy.

More companies are requiring drug testing of their employees, said Mike
Feeney, president of Integrity Check, a drug-testing clinic in Fayetteville.

"We get calls every day," Feeney said. Integrity Check has been open for
less than a year, but he said he is getting more calls from more companies.

Feeney attributes the increase to companies becoming more aware of how much
money drug abuse can cost them.

A Premium On Safety

"If you steal from my company, if you get injured on the job, you are not
only going to cost me money, you might injure one of my employees," Feeney
said.

Kelly-Springfield does the tests to protect its workers, Evans said. "The
company works hard to create a safe working environment in the factory, and
associates expect a safe work environment."

Inebriated workers could threaten that environment, especially in a
factory, Evans said.

In addition to testing potential hires, Kelly-Springfield conducts random
drug tests under special conditions, Evans said. If an employee
participates in a company program for people with drug problems, that
employee must agree to random drug testing, Evans said.

Safety and liability are all legitimate concerns that justify testing job
applicants as a condition of their employment, said David Baumer, an
associate professor at N. C. State University. He also is director of the
Cyber Law Initiative, which held a symposium in the spring about privacy
and security.

But random drug tests infringe on employees' privacy, and companies can
abuse the tests, he said.

Caution Urged

"Employees who are recruiting for possible unionization or employees who
are leaders and make demands for workers' safety -- these people have been
targets for drug tests," Baumer said.

Drug testing is part of a larger issue of employee privacy that needs to be
addressed, Baumer said. Companies monitor telephone calls, e-mail messages
and Internet usage.

"What I see is increasing improvements in technology will make monitoring
by companies more comprehensive," Baumer said.

Random drug testing is just one example of eroding employee privacy, he said.

Feeney, of Integrity Check, said randomness is the very element that makes
drug tests useful. If drug users know when they will be tested, they can
clean up just long enough to give a negative sample. "Common sense would
tell you if you want to keep drug abusers out of your company, you can't
just test them one time," Feeney said.

Drug testing should not be the sole part of a company's drug policy, said
Robert Stephenson, director of the division of workplace programs for the
federal Center for Substance Abuse Prevention. Companies could use
education programs and employee assistance programs to discourage drug
abuse as well.

Stephenson does not rule out random drug tests. "The mere fact that a
person is subject to periodic testing is something that is constantly
present in your mind," he said.

With the prevalence of drug tests comes people who try to cheat, said
Stephanie Feeney, Mike Feeney's sister and the vice president of Integrity
Check. Some people take the herb goldenseal, thinking it will mask drugs in
their systems, Stephanie Feeney said.

Others drink vinegar, Mike Feeney said. Neither vinegar nor goldenseal works.

Bleach, fingernails, hair and gasoline are other impurities people use to
spike their samples, Mike Feeney said. If the sample is tampered with, he
just runs another test.

Another ruse is diluting the sample with water from the toilet, Mike Feeney
said. He solves the problem by dying the toilet water blue.