NO 'REASONABLE CAUSE' IN FIRINGS

The state Court of Appeals ruled Tuesday that two state employees at
John Umstead Hospital in Butner were wrongfully dismissed when they
refused to submit to a drug test, a demand based only on another
employee's suspicions about them.

In a 2-1 decision, the court said that although the government had an
interest in maintaining a drug-free workplace, it was obligated to
protect its workers against unconstitutional searches. Only when the
government has "reasonable cause" can it order an employee to take a
drug test -- although, the court said, "What is 'reasonable' depends
on the privacy and governmental interests involved in the individual
case." The case began Feb. 15, 1997, at Umstead. When Amanda Blanks,
a therapist, arrived at the hospital that day, she saw technicians
Yolandra Best and Roy Hudson leave a small chart room. Blanks said
when she entered the room, she saw a pack of cigarettes, a set of
keys and a straw about 3 to 4 inches long with white residue on one
end. She said Hudson later went back into the room and collected the
items. Blanks said she never saw Best or Hudson using the straw.

Blanks told her supervisor about the incident. A public safety
officer searched Hudson and his truck. Best was subjected to a strip
search, court records said. The officer found a straw on Hudson, but
Blanks later said it wasn't the same one she had seen earlier.
Hospital officials asked Best and Hudson to take drug tests, which
they declined. Two days later they were fired.

They appealed the decision through administrative channels, which
upheld their dismissals. They took their case before Wake County
Superior Court Judge Abraham Penn Jones, who ruled in October 2000
that Umstead officials did not have reasonable cause to order the
drug tests. The state Department of Health and Human Services
appealed.

In its ruling Tuesday, the appeals court said that under state law,
state employees always have the burden of proving they have not used
drugs. But to demand drug tests, the state must have reasonable
cause, which state policy defines as that based on "specific
objective and articulable facts and reasonable inferences drawn from
those facts in light of experience."

The court agreed with Penn that the state did not have reasonable
cause in the cases of Best and Hudson.

Judge Robin Hudson wrote the opinion, with Judge Patricia
Timmons-Goodson in agreement. Dissenting was Judge John Tyson, who
said there was reasonable cause to order the tests, and the refusal
by Best and Hudson "was insubordination that justified their
termination of their state employment."

The split decision gives the state the right to appeal to the Supreme Court.