FIRING DRUG USERS

A worker may report for duty under the influence of drugs - totally
incapable of performing his job accurately and safely, test positive for
narcotics and be fired.

But in Missouri, if that discharged worker found his way to the
unemployment office and filed for jobless benefits, the state and his
former employer could be forced to cover them.

It happened in a third of the drug-related cases that went before the
Missouri Division of Employment Security last year - 550 out of 1,633.

Yet an employee fired for simple misconduct connected with his work would
be ineligible for benefits. That's because misconduct involves behavior
that happens on the job. As state unemployment compensation officials see
it, a drug user could be partaking at home even though the substance is in
his bloodstream at work.

John Oliver, a Cape Girardeau lawyer, is fighting against this precedent.

In Oliver's case, an employee of a Dexter health-care provider said he was
drug free in accordance with company policy. Later, the case alleges, the
employee tested positive for drugs and was fired. ...

With the state's unemployment insurance trust fund nearly insolvent and
businesses struggling to stay afloat, it's time to end the debate by
passing a law that encourages employees to stay clean or suffer the
consequences.