Added: Tieasha Gatto - Date: 07.02.2022 15:11 - Views: 47003 - Clicks: 8421
Back inan Ivy League MBA candidate working on their thesis ed us and asked some pointed questions about workplace drug testing, including the costs involved. We have published our interaction here in an attempt to answer these questions that others may also have. Read our answers to drug testing cost and the other questions directly below!
I am doing a persuasive presentation on why it is necessary for corporations to test for the illegal use of drugs. I was hoping that you would be able to answer a few of my questions including one about drug testing cost:. Adam- Why is it necessary for corporations today to test for the illegal use of drugs? OHS- There are three facts about illegal drugs that lead up to at least one very good reason, Adam:. Adam- Can you give me a rough estimate of how much the drug testing cost is to test one applicant?
The "volume" of testing done by the client annually is one variable which applies to drug testing cost. As with my competitors, a lower drug testing cost is offered to a company doing 5, to 10, or more tests annually than to a company doing only drug tests or only tests each year.
Since we offer services in all 50 U. So, drug testing cost has more than one variable. By federal law, MRO services are required of companies testing employees regulated by the U. In nine states, using an MRO is required by state law of all companies - including those that are not DOT regulated - if they drug test their employees.
Adam- I know that there are different types of tests blood, urine, hairwhich is most effective and what is the drug testing cost difference amongst them? OHS- For the most part, forget blood. Blood is tested for illicit drugs only in extreme or unique cases e. Duringan estimated 55 million drug tests were performed in the United States on job applicants, existing employees who were randomly tested, employees who had or caused a workplace accident or injury, certain federal and state prisoners, certain parolees, recovering addicts, moms or d who were drug tested by court-order as a result of child custody cases, et al.
Urine testing is favored over blood testing and hair testing How much does a blood test for drugs cost because of the drug testing cost differences. This greatly increases overall drug testing cost but does offer some advantages over urine specimen testing. Hair can indicate drug-use can be "effective" as far back as 90 days. Most drugs are detectable in urine for only days; exceptions are marijuana and less-so, PCP.
Hair advocates claim that "more" positives are discovered through hair testing. I would agree in large part because hair can go back further than the days available through urine testing. However, when considering blood or hair follicle testing cost, companies overwhelming choose the lower drug testing cost of urine specimen testing. In any case, the most effective type testing program is "random" testing the immediate testing of an individual with zero advance notice given. Random testing should be done continuously, throughout the entire year.
The "fear of getting caught" is by far the very best deterrent to drug-use in the workplace!
Adam- How easy is it to cheat on a test drink something that will allow an applicant to pass, even though they recently took drugs? I highly doubt it. Laboratories disagree too, countering that advances in lab analysis have enabled them to detect most if not all such attempts. Further, most of these products that are ingested as an attempt to cheat require measured consumption at numerous intervals of time over a hour period prior to providing the urine specimen for testing. Therefore, "random" zero notice given testing greatly hinders if not virtually eliminates any cheating success through "drinking something".
Adam- Are there studies that display the percentage decrease in worker output if they are on drugs? OHS- There are have been many such studies, from different sources including government agencies, university studies, and non-profit organizations. It is especially tragic that drug users at work who steal from their company also tend to steal from their fellow employees- their co-workers! They steal to help "supplement" the cost of their drugs not offset by their employer's wages. They also tend to "recruit" other employees and try to "deal" drugs to them at a profit for that same reason.
Drug users will always deny at least some of the foregoing, claiming that they actually can work better, longer, and are "sharper" at work due to their workplace drug-use.
They're wrong of course, and simply in denial. Mind-altering drugs legitimately prescribed or illicit are called "mind-altering" for very good reason. If you can get back to me at your convenience I would really appreciate it. Again thanks for your help.
OHS- Fine, a drug testing cost versus benefit analysis is a great and enlightening exercise. As our example, let's use a company with 50 employees. You can later project this up or down against a company with only "10" employees or with 1, 10, oremployees. That totals 10 pre-employment tests for the year. So, in this 50 employees scenario, that would add another 25 random tests scheduled annually. Finally, then assume the "possibility" that another 2 drug tests annually need to be ordered as "post-accident" and another 3 tests need to be ordered each year due to "reasonable suspicion" of employee drug-use while on the job.
Or, shuffle the s back or forth. The point is for this scenario, "assume" another "5" drug tests annually combined, either for that first reason or second. Thus, to incorporate a solid and very highly effective, year-around Drug-Free Workplace program, we are now at "40" total drug tests done annually for our sample company with 50 employees.
It will more than enough repay the company in savings of fewer employee sick days, fewer employee injuries on and off the jobless lostbrokenor stolen company equipment, and so on! Let me define what I mean by, "highly effective":. Yes, it is fact: these two industries construction and food services rank as one and two in overall employee workplace drug-abuse.
That is per actual stats determined by national labs which do millions of employee drug tests annually. That, too, is a fact of employee drug testing stats. Yet, that's still too high because it can still cost the employer a ton of money! When I assert that the Drug-Free Workplace program as in the above scenario of a company of 50 or "10", or 1, or 10, will result in a "very highly effective" Drug-Free Workplace, I mean exactly this:. That's "first year" improvement. Further, such dramatic improvement will certainly be at the very least "maintained" - if not bettered - in year two and subsequent years as long as the a drug testing program such as I described above remains steadfastly in place throughout the year.
WHY is that? It's because of two very strong incentives ongoing random, reasonable suspicion drug testing instills in the average person: 1 fear of getting caught and 2 fear of losing the income the job represents.
What happens to those employees that DO continue to use though, and get caught "positive"? They get fired and go to work at some other company that does NOT drug test.
What about new employees replacing them? Well, most individuals who "do" drugs don't even apply for an opening at a company that advertises in the local paper's Help Wanted section it is a "Drug-Free Workplace"! Given the chance for a good job at a company that drug tests employees and any job at one that does NOT drug test its employees, drug-users will almost always apply at the latter company! Exceptions to that practice include drug-users who go "off" drugs for a few days before job interviewing, trying to get their system clean before taking a "pre-employment" drug test.
And these "exceptions" drug-users that pass a pre-employment drug test are one of the primary reasons that "random" testing and "reasonable suspicion" testing and "post-accident" testing are all absolutely essential elements in developing and maintaining a very highly effective Drug-Free Workplace. Soon, the company that once had 50 employees that included perhaps a half-dozen or more people who "did" drugs in their workplace and perhaps even "dealt" drugs in their workplace becomes a "Drug-Free Workplace".
Company production increases and quality of products and services improve Because, those employees who do not do drugs usually know "which" employees do. Most people do not want to be "squealers", so they usually do not turn fellow employees in to the boss. Instead, a Drug-Free Workplace Program does it for them! Adam, is the above persuasive enough for your MBA presentation? I do hope the above information will help you. If it gets you your MBA, then please have them send me one, too! My very best wishes to you for great success with your presentation!
Ed Poole Wishing you good health and personal safety always. Edward W. Poole edpoole ohsinc. OHS Fax: Cost of Drug Testing. I was hoping that you would be able to answer a few of my questions including one about drug testing cost: Adam- Why is it necessary for corporations today to test for the illegal use of drugs? Adam OHS- Fine, a drug testing cost versus benefit analysis is a great and enlightening exercise. Let me define what I mean by, "highly effective": In the first months of newly-instituted random drug testing of their employees, every company can normally anticipate i.
That's "initially". There's even more reward than that.How much does a blood test for drugs cost
email: [email protected] - phone:(276) 787-2195 x 4111
Find Lab Tests Online