Pubdate: Sat, 08 Sep 2012
Source: Calgary Herald (CN AB)
Copyright: 2012 Canwest Publishing Inc.
Contact: http://www2.canada.com/calgaryherald/letters.html
Website: http://www.calgaryherald.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/66

LIFE SAVER

Union is wrong to oppose random drug tests for oilsands workers

It's disappointing to see a union place concerns about its members'
privacy ahead of a very serious workplace health and safety issue.
Unfortunately, the Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union of
Canada remains firmly opposed to a two-year pilot project scheduled to
begin next month that would institute random drug testing among
workers at Suncor Energy, Total E&P Canada and Canadian Natural
Resources Ltd.

The CEP claims random drug tests constitute "an affront to the privacy
and dignity of an individual." Instead, the CEP is calling for
"broadly based programs focusing on education and prevention."

Statements from oil industry officials, however, indicate that an
educational approach is not working and something tougher is needed. A
study conducted three years ago by the Shepell-fgi research group
found that oilsands workers were 43 per cent likelier to use addiction
counselling provided by their employer than workers in other fields.
And The Economist reported in 2007 that, "Drug abuse in the northern
oil patch is more than four times the provincial average.... According
to Harold Hoffman, a specialist in occupational medicine in Edmonton,
about 40 per cent of the workers test positive for cocaine or
marijuana in job screening or post-accident tests."

The energy industry is by nature a dangerous place to be employed. It
is made much more hazardous if workers impaired by drugs or alcohol
are on site in positions where, for example, their use of heavy
machinery while under the influence could endanger other employees'
lives.

One would think that the CEP would be anxious to protect all its
members from workplace injury or death, rather than shield them from
drug testing -- something the Alberta Human Rights Commission has
already ruled is not a violation of their human rights. Instead, the
commission ruled that employees' human rights are violated only when
the employer mishandles a substance-abusing worker. There's a huge
difference -- and any worker suffering from a substance abuse problem
deserves compassion and assistance. But it is imperative that someone
who is abusing drugs or alcohol be discovered before an accident
happens. Meanwhile, the Canadian Human Rights Commission has ruled
testing is permissible for safety-sensitive job positions, as well as
after an accident and if an employee shows up for work seemingly impaired.

The phrase safety-sensitive would encompass the vast majority of
manual labour positions in the oilsands, and the industry is to be
commended for its attentiveness to workplace safety by bringing in
random testing.

The pilot program may turn out to need tweaking -- for example, it may
be necessary to differentiate between a worker who was stoned or high
after his shift the night before and one who has residue in his system
from drug use days or weeks earlier. Regardless, the safety of all
employees takes precedence over any other concern. This would be a
good time for those workers who have something to fear from the
results of random drug testing to seek help for any addictions they
may have.

Shame on the CEP for opposing a workplace health and safety measure
that will save lives.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Matt