Pubdate: Thu, 06 Dec 2007
Source: Charleston Daily Mail (WV)
Copyright: 2007 Charleston Daily Mail
Contact:  http://www.dailymail.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/76
Author: Kelly L. Holleran
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/testing.htm (Drug Test)
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/youth.htm (Youth)

RANDOM DRUG TESTING MAY BE OFF TABLE FOR SCHOOLS

Dozens of Kanawha County school employees have spoken  out against a
proposed drug policy, even as the school  system appears ready to back
off random drug testing  for faculty and administrators.

Board members are set to vote Dec. 13 on the proposed  policy that
would drug test employees in safety  sensitive positions, such as
principals, counselors,  coaches, teachers and child care workers.

The proposed policy does not include random drug  testing because some
education officials were concerned  about becoming the first school
board in the state to  enforce such measures, said Jim Withrow,
general  counsel for Kanawha County Schools. An adviser earlier  had
said the school system should brace for winding up  in court as a test
case over the policy.

The policy does, however, include drug testing in six  different
circumstances - pre-employment, for-cause,  missing substance, fitness
for duty, promotion and  transfer and return to duty testing.

Anyone being considered for employment by Kanawha  County Schools
would have to undergo pre-employment  testing.

When the Kanawha County Board of Education, through its
administrative assistant of human resources, reasonably  suspects that
an employee is using drugs, a for-cause  drug test will be performed.

A for-cause drug test can only be invoked in a chronic  case and an
acute case.

A chronic case results from "deteriorating job  performance or
observations in personal traits  characteristics where the use of
alcohol or drugs may  be reasonably suspected as the cause," according
to the  revised policy.

An acute case happens when an employee appears "in a  specific
incident or observation to then be under the  present influence of
alcohol and/or drugs or  investigation of an accident where the use of
alcohol  or drugs is reasonably suspected to be a contributing
cause," according to the revised policy.

When there is a medication discrepancy or when a  substance is
missing, all employees who were involved  in the discrepancy or who
had access to the missing  substance will go through a missing
substance drug  test.

Any employees who are thought to be unfit for duty as  the direct use
of drugs or the reasonably suspicious  use of drugs will take a
fitness for duty drug test.

When a current Kanawha County schools employee applies  for another
safety-sensitive position in the school  system, he/she has to undergo
a promotion and transfer  drug test.

Employees who go through a drug rehabilitation program  must take a
return to duty test before going back to  work.

The current county policy already in effect only allows  for mandatory
drug testing of bus drivers and for cause  testing.

Almost all of the 50 people who commented on the  proposed drug policy
on the Board of Education's Web  site have lashed out against it.

"I have taught students for 36 years and I am  personally insulted
that a school board would have so  little respect, nay hatred, of its
employees that  universal drug testing has even been proposed," Greg
Dodd said on the comments page.

"I have dedicated my ENTIRE adult life to education and  have never
once used drugs. If the school board has so  little confidence in me,
I see little use of continuing  in this system. The day that I am
asked to fill a  bottle for a drug test will be the day that I tender
my  resignation as a teacher in Kanawha County."

If teachers are drug tested, then everyone in the  school system also
should be, one teacher said.

The current policy does not list administrators or  board members as
people who are in safety sensitive  positions.

"If this is truly a measure of wishing to keep our  schools drug free,
then the policy in all of its forms  should be extended to include the
students, as well,"  Diane Ferguson said. "Bring in the drug dogs to
all  schools on a regular basis, etc. Otherwise, the  proposed policy
is yet another teacher witch hunt. I  have yet to see a teacher 'high'
in any Kanawha County  school building, but I observe and am forced to
  tolerate the affects of students who appear to be under  the
influence of illegal substances in the high school  setting
frequently. Be consistent to all who are in a  Kanawha County School
setting or in the proposed policy  is unequal and therefore,
constitutionally unsound."

Withrow said board members could include administrators  and
themselves under safety sensitive positions if they  so wished.

The policy, which does state that it applies to all  faculty, includes
administrators, Withrow said.

"When you talk about faculty, that's in a generic  sense," he said.

Not everyone was as critical of the policy.

"Drug testing teachers is something the majority of  taxpayers
support," Bill Lamont said on the comments  page. "I will not pay for
a bunch of drug-addicted  people to teach my children."

Board member Pete Thaw would like to see random drug  testing included
on the policy.

"If you don't have random, you don't have anything," he  said. "It's
foolish to do away with that. I will vote  for random drug testing
until the cows come home."

The school system is willing to shell out money for  other programs,
and it needs to be willing to pay for  drug testing, Thaw said.

"When you can waste a million dollars on Teach First,  if you can
spend $400,000 on travel, then whatever it  costs to do drug testing,
then you've got to put those  things in perspective," he said. "That
(Teach First) is  wasted money. That has nothing to do with the safety
of  the children. Yet we can't swallow a bill for $200,000  for drug
testing? I don't think it's a needless  expense.

"I think we have a (drug) problem in Kanawha County  Schools."

Board member Barbara Welch disagrees.

"I don't think we have a problem," she said. "I just  think it's (the
policy is) something we need to look at  very carefully. I don't want
something to be very  punitive."

School board members need to make sure any policy that  is passed is
consistent with the law, board member Bill  Raglin said.

"I don't know whether we would want to go beyond that  at this point,"
he said. "I would love for it to  include random testing, but I don't
know if at this  point, it would fly. I think we ought to pick the
best  policy we can and move on."

School board President Jim Crawford said he will have  to wait until
the Dec. 13 meeting to see what the board  would like to do.

"I'm not going to do something that won't stand the  muster of the
courts," he added.

School board member Becky Jordon likes the policy as it is.

"Pre-employment is fine," she said. "No random is  fine."
- ---
MAP posted-by: Derek