Man Refuses Drug Test, Loses Wrongful Dismissal Case

[Dragonfan]

Otago Daily Times

Wed, 19 Nov 2008 A man who refused a drug test and was sacked from a meat processing plant has lost his claim for unjustified dismissal.

Jonathon Parker took his employer Silver Fern Farms Ltd, owners of the Oringi plant near Dannevirke, to the Employment Relations Authority.

Mr Parker worked at the plant from February 2002 until his dismissal on December 7, 2007. He was a union member and there were no warnings or disciplinary issues in respect to his performance before he was sacked.

Because of concerns about drug use, the union and the company management had agreed on a drug testing policy which was introduced in January 2007. A key theme of the policy was to remove the abuse, not the abuser, and offer rehabilitation assistance for those who tested positive at work.

On October 31, 2007, the company conducted a drug search of employees' vehicles in the plant car park. A small amount of marijuana was found in Mr Parker's car and he was seen swallowing something at the same time his car was being searched and drinking the contents of a container. He denied ownership of the drug. Mr Parker was asked to remain on the site, not to start work, and to meet management. But, after telling his union delegate he was stressed, he left the workplace, despite advice from the delegate and a company manager he should stay.

Mr Parker saw his doctor and was diagnosed as medically unfit for work from November 1 until December 5 and he was paid for that period. At a meeting on December 7 the company said it intended issuing Mr Parker with a final warning and required him to take a drug test as a condition of his returning to work. He was unwilling to undergo the test and was dismissed. Mr Parker argued that the company's process was unfair and he had been singled out.

Authority member Denis Asher said he was satisfied Mr Parker was bound by the provisions of his collective employer agreement and the related company drug and alcohol policy. He believed the company was fair and reasonable in requiring Mr Parker to undergo a test before returning to work.

[WantDaChronic]

i can understand a company wanting to piss test their employees, but what in the fuck gave anyone the right to search through another person's belongings without a gun, badge and in alot of cases a signed warrent too?

 

my argument would be that they had no legal right to search my vehicle, i deny ownership of the drugs that were found during that illegal search and that i could never return to that workplace due to all the other employees looking down on me for something i wasnt even guilty of. the workplace might be a physically safe environment, but with all those judgemental eyes on me i cant concentrate on anything other than wanting to end my life because i cant take the stress of it all any longer.

 

if he argued something like that and actually won it would mean no piss test and no employment, but he sure would get a nice golden parachute to help him land on his feet

[bufo marinus]

As well as searching his car, the piss police noticed he 'swallowed something'

Like what an an orange, his tongue, a big handful of smarties?

I can hardly believe I am reading this.

These companies introduce drug testing for ONE reason, and one reason only, to drop their insurance premiums if they can show their workforce is 'drug free'

It has NOTHING to do with safety and everything to do with MONEY.

If you know anyone who is a piss policeman/woman do as I have done in the past and give them as much shit as you can about ruining peoples lives and tell them what they already know, that the piss test for Cannabis is biased, and get a real job ya parasites