NCJ Number
108105
Journal
Creighton Law Review Volume: 20 Dated: (1987) Pages: 961-1008
Date Published
1987
Length
48 pages
Annotation
This article analyzes the Eighth Circuit Court's responses to various causes of action asserted by both private and public sector employees when an employer has instituted a drug-testing program, and it provides guidance for labor and management in the implementation of drug-testing programs.
Abstract
In McDonell v. Hunter, the plaintiffs, employees of the Iowa Department of Corrections, initiated a class action suit claiming civil damages for the deprivation of constitutional rights when the Department of Corrections implemented a mandatory urinalysis drug-testing program. The court held that the prison's security interests justified mandatory employee drug testing. The Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employees (Union) v. Burlington Northern Railroad Co. was occasioned by the private employer's unilateral initiation of mandatory drug-testing program that required employees involved in an accident to undergo a post-incident urinalysis test, along with employees returning from furloughs. The court ruled that the drug testing was a minor departure from the bargaining agreement and should be resolved by the National Railway Adjustment Board. These decisions illustrate the court's weighing of employer and employee competing rights in an effort to ensure employee and public safety while respecting employee's individual rights. The balance struck in 'McDonell' was proper, but the court should have supported employees' right to bargain on the drug-testing issue in 'Burlington.' 458 footnotes.