CITY DEFENDS DRUG TESTING

The Program Has Drawn Fire, But Officials Say It's A Success.

The city of Tulsa's controversial random drug testing policy has traveled a
rough road in its first five years, drawing fire from multiple City Hall
employee fronts.

City management has won most of the challenges, such as the case of the
city employee who attributed his positive test to second-hand smoke.

An employee who complained about the religious-based treatment program also
failed to win back a job.

But the program has been dealt some setbacks.

Two employees who were fired in 1996 after twice testing positive for drugs
have won court decisions that ordered the city to give them new Civil
Service Commission hearings.

For the past six years, city officials have attempted to impose drug
testing on police, only to drop the issue during contract negotiations
after meeting resistance from the local Fraternal Order of Police.

And finally, city officials have suspended the drug-testing program for
some of its employees in response to successful legal challenges in other
states.

Despite the setbacks, city officials cite evidence that they say shows the
program has been a success.

Mike Bates, human resources director, points to statistics showing a steady
decrease in positive tests.

"I think it's been worth the effort," Bates said.

Since the U.S. Department of Transportation in 1995 required employees with
commercial driver's licenses to be subject to random drug testing, fewer
and fewer city employees falling under the classification have tested
positive for drugs.

The labor and trade employees, referred to as LTs, were the first in the
city to be subject to a random testing program.

During the first three months of the program in 1995, 12 percent of the
drug tests given to labor and trade employees came back positive.

Since then, the number of labor and trade employees testing positive has
steadily decreased to a current 4 percent rate.

"That's a lot of improvement over 12 percent," Bates said.

The city expanded the program in January 1996 to include LTs in so-called
safety-sensitive positions, such as water treatment plant or heavy
equipment operators.

Eleven percent of safety-sensitive LTs tested positive for drug or alcohol
use. The number testing positive today has tumbled to 4 percent, Bates said.

The leader of the city's labor and trade union -- American Federation of
State, County and Municipal Employees -- has battled the city numerous
times over drug testing.

The union has challenged the city's interpretation that anybody who had a
driver's license and was considered in a safety-sensitive position and thus
needed to be tested, said Bob Breck, Local No. 1180 president.

"They inappropriately interpreted the (Department of Transportation) laws,"
Breck said.

The city has suspended random drug tests for safety-sensitive LTs and
certain non-union employees deemed to be in safety-sensitive posts, Bates
confirmed.

The city has since expanded drug testing to include other groups of city
employees.

The fire department was included in July 1996. Six percent of firefighters
taking drug tests during the first year tested positive, Bates said.

In 1998, 2 percent to 3 percent of firefighters tested came back positive.

In June 1997, the city began testing so-called exempt employees --
typically, white-collar and management-level jobs.

Bates said only 1 percent of that group of employees have tested positive.

Future plans call for including employees in the office-technical job
classifications who are deemed to be in safety-sensitive positions, Bates
said. Employees targeted for inclusion in drug testing include certain
airport workers and 911 dispatchers, Bates said.

And the city will attempt to bring the police department into the
drug-testing program, a move that has drawn resistance from the FOP.

City officials say police have been last on their list of priorities to
test because officers would be least likely to break the laws they are
hired to uphold.

The city has for the past six years put drug testing on the table when it
begins to negotiate a contract with the FOP. Each time, the city has
dropped the issue prior to reaching an agreement.

Police maintain that it's not necessary to test the force.

In his 18 years on the force, Tulsa FOP President Bob Jackson said no
officer has been identified or disciplined for being under the influence of
drugs.

"I think we've got a pretty convincing work history here that there is no
problem that would warrant a change in the policy and really for the city
to take on the expense to do it just to say they do it," Jackson said.

Asked if the department would always oppose drug testing, Jackson replied
"I don't want to use the words `never ever,' " Jackson said.

Meanwhile, Breck questions the effectiveness of the drug-testing program
vs. the need to intrude into a person's private life.

"There have probably been situations and circumstances where this has been
imposed on people where their problem perhaps was that they were using an
illegal substance that was not interfering with their work or their jobs,"
Breck said.

"We haven't seen any massive slashing of the accident rate or anything like
that," Breck said.