Pubdate: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 Source: Albuquerque Journal (NM) Copyright: 2000 Albuquerque Journal Contact: P.O. Drawer J, Albuquerque, N.M. 87103 Website: http://www.abqjournal.com/ Author: Guillermo Contreras DRUG-TEST CASE OK'D FOR TRIAL Former city of Albuquerque mechanic Donald E. Morales chose his family over work in 1996, and he ended up getting fired for it. This week, U.S. District Judge Martha Vazquez denied the city's request to throw out his lawsuit. Vazquez also dismissed two of three total counts and Transit Department director Anne Watkins and Chief Administrative Officer Lawrence Rael as defendants from the suit. Trial is scheduled for Aug. 21. The case stems from Morales' refusal to take a random drug test in April 1996. Court documents said Morales refused because he was given late notice that he would have to take the test. Morales told his bosses he had a prior commitment to take his children to school and accompany his daughter on a field trip, but the city refused to let him call his wife and make other arrangements, court records said. The drug-testing facility is at a different location from where Morales worked as a transit mechanic, and Morales had said an earlier test took about 21/2 hours to complete. Vazquez's ruling said that in this case, family came first, and that there was no evidence Morales used drugs during his two years with the Transit Department. She also said the timing of the test was "motivated purely by the city's administrative convenience." "Under these circumstances, the plaintiff's private interest of maintaining the integrity of his familial commitments greatly outweighs the city's interest in administering its drug detection and deterrence policy," the judge wrote. Vazquez noted that Morales was amenable to the city's drug-testing policy because he consented to a test months earlier. "We're very pleased. We're glad the judge studied the case the way she did," said Morales' attorney, Paul Livingston. "It's a city drug situation where they took a man with no drug history, with a spotless record ... yet they became unreasonable." Assistant City Attorney Victor Valdez said the city was pleased the judge dismissed all the defendants except the city and all counts except Morales' claim that the city violated his Fourth Amendment rights to be free from unreasonable search and seizure. "The city's happy, and it looks forward to addressing the court's concerns and showing the judge that the city's procedures were reasonable in this particular matter," Valdez said. Valdez said the city administers random drug tests to all employees in safety-sensitive positions -- including transit mechanics. According to court records: Morales, who worked the overnight shift, was selected for random drug testing four days before the incident took place. An hour before his shift ended on April 22, 1996, a supervisor told him he had to take a drug test. Morales told his supervisor about the family commitment, and that when he took a previous test, he was told to do so at the start of his shift. He was told he could be fired if he refused to take the test immediately. He was also told he could not call his wife to make other arrangements for his children. When he refused to take the test, he was put on leave and then fired for violating the city's drug-testing policy. An arbitrator later upheld the firing. Vazquez said the city gave no justification for refusing to allow Morales to call his wife. The judge also said there is dispute over whether it was feasible to call Morales in for testing four days earlier, when the city had chosen him for the drug test. - --- MAP posted-by: Doc-Hawk