Employee Drug Testing -- Statement of L. Nye Stevens, Associate Director, US General Accounting Office, General Government Division, Before the House Subcommittee on Employment Opportunities, April 21, 1988

• NCJ Number: 158952
• Author(s): L. Nye Stevens
• Date Published: 1988
• Length: 9 pages
• Corporate Author: US Government Accountability Office
• Sale Source: Azimuth Inc.
• Publication Type: Survey
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America
• Note: DCC

Annotation

The General Accounting Office obtained and reviewed 10 surveys of private sector drug testing to assess the extent and nature of employee drug testing.

Abstract

The number of firms surveyed ranged from a low of 100 to a high of approximately 35,000. The actual number of respondents providing information varied from a low of 60 to a high of more than 1,900. Survey indicated that drug testing was a common but not universal practice in the private sector, that firms were more likely to test applicants than employees, that larger firms were more likely to conduct drug testing than smaller firms, and more firms planned to implement drug testing programs in the future. Survey data also showed that a few firms did not provide confirmatory tests to employees or applicants who initially tested positive, did not tell applicants they were not hired because of a positive drug test, and retested employees or applicants using the same initial test. Most survey respondents reported using urinalysis as the drug testing method. Among firms testing employees, most cited testing for cause, such as after an accident, as the reason for testing. Reasons most often identified for having a drug testing program included improving workplace safety, increasing productivity, curbing illegal drug use, and reducing employee medical costs.