News (Media Awareness Project) - US IA: Worker Drug-Testing Bill In Branstad's Hands |
Title: | US IA: Worker Drug-Testing Bill In Branstad's Hands |
Published On: | 1998-03-05 |
Source: | The Waterloo Courier |
Fetched On: | 2008-09-07 14:27:51 |
WORKER DRUG-TESTING BILL IN BRANSTAD'S HANDS
DES MOINES - The Iowa House sent the governor a drug testing bill Wednesday
that allows businesses to test their workers randomly.
"It's finally saying we're going to address illegal drugs in the
workplace," said Rep. Steve Sukup, R-Dougherty, who steered the bill
through the 7 1/2-hour debate. "Forty-three other states have random drug
testing laws."
The bill passed 53-46 after minority Democrats argued more than 20
amendments to expand protections for workers.
Majority Republicans revived an effort last year to rewrite the state's
drug testing laws.
Current law mandates an employer can test employees randomly with 30 days'
notice or "probable cause." The business also must pay for treatment
programs.
"We're going to change this bad law," Rep. Jeff Lamberti, R-Ankeny, said.
Last year's push to strip treatment programs from the law failed to muster
votes in the Republican-controlled Senate, but a new version secured the
needed votes because it included one-time employer-paid treatment for
alcohol and illegal drug use. The bill also exempts small businesses from
providing treatment.
The bill also lowers the threshold of testing to "reasonable suspicion"
from probable cause.
"Drug testing is an invasion of an individual's privacy and only a fool
would deny that," said Rep. Phil Wise, D-Keokuk. "Protecting public safety
vs. privacy -- this is a balance that has to be struck very carefully. We
should not err in either direction."
Wise also said courts have ruled public employees not in "safety-sensitive"
jobs cannot be subject to random drug tests, and private employees should
share the same constitutional rights.
One of the more heated moments came when an amendment failed 46-52 to allow
minors to be tested by people of the same sex.
"It does not protect those minors from having an adult of the opposite sex
witness the urine test," said Rep. Keith Weigel, D-New Hampton.
Rep. Bill Dotzler, D-Waterloo, a union activist and machine operator at
Deere & Co., attempted to raise the blood-alcohol minimum for firing an
employee in the bill from .04 to .05.
"You will give the employer the opportunity to fire you if you have a wine
cooler at lunch if you don't weigh 200 pounds," Dotzler said.
But Sukup said: "It looks like we're up for 2 1/2 beers for breakfast with
this amendment ...
"If you are .10, you are legally drunk. This amendment says you can show up
to work and be legally drunk and we'll pay for your treatment."
A proposal also failed to set up a random drug testing program for state
legislators.
"Whatever standards we choose to impose on the State of Iowa, we ought to
be able to impose on ourselves," said Rep. Ed Fallon, D-Des Moines. "What
we're talking about here is sending our workers to the restroom with cup in
hand coming back and subjecting themselves to the humiliation and
embarrassment of being treated as ... guilty."
Gov. Terry Branstad is expected to sign the bill.
© The Waterloo Courier 1998
DES MOINES - The Iowa House sent the governor a drug testing bill Wednesday
that allows businesses to test their workers randomly.
"It's finally saying we're going to address illegal drugs in the
workplace," said Rep. Steve Sukup, R-Dougherty, who steered the bill
through the 7 1/2-hour debate. "Forty-three other states have random drug
testing laws."
The bill passed 53-46 after minority Democrats argued more than 20
amendments to expand protections for workers.
Majority Republicans revived an effort last year to rewrite the state's
drug testing laws.
Current law mandates an employer can test employees randomly with 30 days'
notice or "probable cause." The business also must pay for treatment
programs.
"We're going to change this bad law," Rep. Jeff Lamberti, R-Ankeny, said.
Last year's push to strip treatment programs from the law failed to muster
votes in the Republican-controlled Senate, but a new version secured the
needed votes because it included one-time employer-paid treatment for
alcohol and illegal drug use. The bill also exempts small businesses from
providing treatment.
The bill also lowers the threshold of testing to "reasonable suspicion"
from probable cause.
"Drug testing is an invasion of an individual's privacy and only a fool
would deny that," said Rep. Phil Wise, D-Keokuk. "Protecting public safety
vs. privacy -- this is a balance that has to be struck very carefully. We
should not err in either direction."
Wise also said courts have ruled public employees not in "safety-sensitive"
jobs cannot be subject to random drug tests, and private employees should
share the same constitutional rights.
One of the more heated moments came when an amendment failed 46-52 to allow
minors to be tested by people of the same sex.
"It does not protect those minors from having an adult of the opposite sex
witness the urine test," said Rep. Keith Weigel, D-New Hampton.
Rep. Bill Dotzler, D-Waterloo, a union activist and machine operator at
Deere & Co., attempted to raise the blood-alcohol minimum for firing an
employee in the bill from .04 to .05.
"You will give the employer the opportunity to fire you if you have a wine
cooler at lunch if you don't weigh 200 pounds," Dotzler said.
But Sukup said: "It looks like we're up for 2 1/2 beers for breakfast with
this amendment ...
"If you are .10, you are legally drunk. This amendment says you can show up
to work and be legally drunk and we'll pay for your treatment."
A proposal also failed to set up a random drug testing program for state
legislators.
"Whatever standards we choose to impose on the State of Iowa, we ought to
be able to impose on ourselves," said Rep. Ed Fallon, D-Des Moines. "What
we're talking about here is sending our workers to the restroom with cup in
hand coming back and subjecting themselves to the humiliation and
embarrassment of being treated as ... guilty."
Gov. Terry Branstad is expected to sign the bill.
© The Waterloo Courier 1998
Member Comments |
No member comments available...