NCJ Number
112858
Journal
Alaska Law Review Volume: 5 Issue: 1 Dated: (June 1988) Pages: 133-160
Date Published
1988
Length
28 pages
Annotation
In deciding to test employees for drug use, private and public employers face a great deal of legal uncertainty that may give them ample reason not to test at all.
Abstract
While private-sector employers are not prohibited from drug testing by the Alaskan or the U.S. Constitution, they face other legal hurdles under the National Labor Relations Act, under the State's discrimination act, and under good faith and good cause exceptions to the employment-at-will doctrine. Public employers, on the other hand, will probably be able to test certain employees only on the basis of reasonable suspicion. Further, Alaskan courts may in the future expand constitutional guarantees to include protection from private intrusion not instigated under State authority. In addition to these problems, employers should consider several other factors before implementing drug testing programs, including cost, effects on morale and labor-management relations, availability of alternatives, and the potential for other types of legal liability (e.g., defamation, negligence, wrongful discharge). If employers still decide to test despite these considerations, they also must determine whom to test, what notification and testing procedures to use, and how to deal with drug-abusing employees. 194 footnotes.