BROKERAGE'S DRUG TEST MAY BE ILLEGAL

Policy At Edward Jones

Edward Jones, one of the largest stock brokerages in the United States,
requires its Canadian employees to take a pre-employment drug test, which
experts say probably violates Canadian human rights codes and contravenes
recent court rulings.

The Missouri-based firm imported its zero-tolerance drug policy into Canada
in 1994, when it opened its first Canadian office.

The company openly advertises its policy on its online Canadian application
form, requiring applicants to "consent to a pre-employment drug screen in
accordance with the firm's current drug testing policy."

Edward Jones officials in Canada and the United States declined to comment
on the policy.

The firm has about 250 financial advisors in Canada and 8,000 in the U.S.
and Britain.

Workplace drug and alcohol testing in the United States is common, but
Canadian courts have severely restricted their use.

In July, 2000, the Ontario Court of Appeal declared both alcohol and drug
testing by companies to be a violation of the province's human rights code.

The court said a Breathalyzer is permissible for people in high-risk jobs
such as oil refinery workers, pilots and train engineers because it
determines whether someone is impaired at the moment the test is
administered, the judges said.

However, because drug testing only measures past use, not present
impairment, future impairment or likely impairment on the job, the court
ruled that the defendant, Imperial Oil, could not justify pre-employment
testing or random drug testing for employees. Imperial Oil has since
suspended its pre-employment drug screening test.

The Imperial case "clearly says pre-employment testing is contrary to the
human rights code," said Jeffrey Andrew, a lawyer involved in the case.

"The big problem with a drug test is it only proves exposure in the past.
It doesn't give you any indication of where, when and what quantities, and
a test won't show you are guilty of any workplace deficiency."

Alan Borovoy, general counsel for the Canadian Civil Liberties Association,
said a 1998 federal Court of Appeal decision further prohibits drug tests.

The federal court ruled a drug-testing policy implemented in 1990 by the
Toronto-Dominion Bank to screen newly hired employees was discriminatory.

The policy, which stated that testing was to "maintain a safe, healthy and
productive workplace, to safeguard bank and customer funds and information
and to protect the bank's reputation," violated the Canadian Human Rights
Act because it could discriminate against certain employees and because it
is not sufficiently related to job performance.

"There's a very good chance that the Edward Jones policy is a violation of
our human rights legislation -- take your pick, provincial and federal,"
Mr. Borovoy said yesterday.

He characterized drug testing as a "urinary witch hunt. It becomes an
invasion of personal privacy."

Some potential Edward Jones applicants agree.

"I am not comfortable with the idea of surrendering my right to privacy, no
matter the reason, especially when a demand that I do is against the law,"
said a financial planner interested in applying for a post at Edward Jones.

Linda Galessiere, a lawyer at the human rights division of the law firm
Goodman Carr, said Edward Jones has a tough task ahead of it if the policy
is challenged.

"It seems to me a bit of a stretch," Ms. Galessiere said of invoking a
workplace safety argument. "If it is a standard thing in the industry, they
have the usual chance to prove it's necessary."

Thomas Caldwell, chairman of Caldwell Securities in Toronto, said most
firms try to help employees if a drug or alcohol problem is detected. "Our
tipoff would be the realm of job performance and I think that's the correct
place to do this. I'm more comfortable with that kind of approach."

One Canadian employee of Edward Jones said he shrugged off the drug test
when he took it after receiving a conditional job offer. "The company has a
zero tolerance drug policy. I'm anti-drugs, so I didn't have a problem with
it. It's one of the most passionate things in my life."

"I know for me, it didn't bother me," another said of the drug test.