NO TO MANDATORY TESTS

Given the appalling lapses in the death of TTC worker Antonio
Almeida, transit officials are taking steps to improve workplace
safety, including the drafting of a new "fitness for duty" policy.

That much is good. It would be unconscionable to continue with a
business-as-usual attitude after the 38-year-old was crushed by
flying debris when improperly stowed scaffolding on a subway
maintenance car hit a tunnel wall last spring. Unfortunately, the
results of blood testing released last week showed that Almeida
likely smoked marijuana at work, although it played no known role in
the accident.

By coincidence, a TTC bus driver was charged with impaired driving
around the time that news broke about Almeida's condition. And these
two incidents are fuelling calls for mandatory drug and alcohol
screening of TTC employees.

That goes too far. The Toronto Transit Commission's governing board,
which meets today, would be wrong to seize on these incidents to
pursue mandatory testing as part of its new policy.

While rare in Canada, drug and alcohol screening of transit workers
has become commonplace in the United States. But drug tests are an
imperfect tool, as they reflect previous use of illicit substances
rather than impairment while on duty. A worker's indulgence in a
recreational drug while on vacation, for example, would be revealed
to his or her employer. That is not the boss's business.

Instead of random screening, action ought to be taken when there is
some evidence of impairment on the job. Indeed, police tested the
allegedly impaired bus driver after he was reported by concerned
riders. That is as it should be.

Just as in many other Canadian workplaces, some TTC staff surely do
indulge in drugs and alcohol when they shouldn't. But there is no
evidence that such abuse is on the rise or that it poses an undue
threat to the public. As a result, there is no reason to impose
random testing that violates privacy rights.