JUST SAY NO TO DRUG TESTING

KANAWHA County school board member Pete Thaw wants to institute
random drug testing for teachers and administrators. Here we go again.

The board should not bother testing teachers and administrators
unless there is some cause to think it is necessary.

The county now gives drug tests to school bus drivers and other
employees involved directly with the safety of children. This
protects students from harm and likely protects the county from
lawsuits. The courts have upheld the testing of bus drivers and
others in safety-sensitive positions.

Thaw's argument that teaching positions are safety-sensitive is more
of a stretch. Teachers do not guide classrooms down winding roads in winter.

When the issue first arose this spring, the price tag was pegged at $200,000.

That did not include the cost of a likely court challenge by the
teachers unions, nor did it include the cost of a myriad of grievance
appeals if, heaven forefend, any teacher or administrator should
happen to test positive and then face disciplinary action.

The board wisely voted against testing teachers.

Now the push returns. A Tennessee court ruled in 1998 that the drug
testing of teachers was OK. But can anyone recall the last time West
Virginia courts sided with the employer on a major issue?

Thaw's enthusiasm for testing teachers, however, is offset by the
doubts of the other members of the board.

Said Becky Jordon: "I think we need to be cautious."

Board President Jim Crawford was even firmer in opposing drug
testing. "I don't want to spend money in court," he said.

Absent evidence of widespread TUI -- teaching under the influence --
this is a solution without any problem.

The drug testing of teachers and administrators is not worth the
effort, or the court battle.