news-record.com

NEWS

Ask a reporter: City has drug-testing policy for its officers

Article
Comments (9)

Saturday, May 2, 2009

(Updated 6:59 am)

By Ryan Seals
Staff Writer

Are city employees, including police officers and firefighters, subject to random drug testing? If so, why don’t we hear about employees losing their jobs in the news? In some cases, many of these individuals are still able to work with and or coach our children, whether on a voluntary basis or paid. We as parents should be made aware.

— Name withheld by request

According to the City of Greensboro’s substance abuse policy: “In accordance with the most recent legislation and court rulings, most city employees are subject to pre-placement, 'for cause,’ and post-accident drug and alcohol testing. In addition ... sworn police officers, sworn firefighters, 911 emergency communications specialists and those in safety sensitive positions are also subject to random drug and alcohol testing.”

However, anyone who tests positive and gets fired is protected by personnel privacy laws under N.C. General Statute 126-22 regarding such information being made public.

Under G.S. 126-23, the public is entitled to: an employee’s age, date of original employment or appointment, current position title, current salary, date and the amount of the most recent increase or decrease in salary, the office to which the employee is assigned and the date of the most recent promotion, demotion, transfer, suspension, separation or other change in position classification.

Also, should criminal charges be filed against an individual for any reason — unless sealed by court order — police reports, returned arrest and search warrants, indictments and criminal summons are public record and must be made available for inspection. Though not free, criminal background checks are available at the Guilford County courthouse.

Pat Boswell, a spokeswoman for the city of Greensboro, said the city does investigate allegations of misconduct involving employees. The allegation alone will not be accepted as the truth, she said, but it causes supervisors to look for corroborating signs of certain behavior and can lead to possible questioning of the employee.

Such information can be given to the city’s Human Resources Department at 373-2020.

As for an employee who was fired for drug-related reasons and is still coaching children, the best advice would be to present such allegations to the governing board that oversees that team’s sport.

— Ryan Seals

Accompanying Photos

File photo (News & Record)

Photo Caption: Greensboro Police Department headquarters.

GOT A QUESTION?

Call 373-7154 or e-mail teresa.prout @news-record.com with your question or concern, your name and an e-mail address or a phone number.

If we are able to help, a reporter will be in touch with you.

Advertisement | Advertise with Us

Comments

View Comments

This article has been closed to new comments. Comments are generally closed after 14 days. However, comments may be closed earlier at the discretion of the News & Record.

Inappropriate content? Please report abuse.

Panacea

May 2, 2009 - 9:13 am EDT

Mr. Seals your reporting is incomplete.

Did you bother to ask the City if their policy is to automatically fire a city employee who fails a random drug test?

I bet the answer is no. At least, I hope it's no.

Drug and alcohol addiction is an illness. Treatment, not punishment, is the solution.

I'm not saying a police officer who fails a drug test should be allowed to keep carrying a weapon. Obviously not. But if successfully treated, there are other things a peace officer can do until he earns back the privilege of carrying a weapon or driving a police car.

My bet is that a policy to cover this does exist.

Why did this question even come up in the first place? What possible reason could this letter writer have to ask such a question of the paper?

If a coach is doing a good job, then his work business is his business. We don't need to know it. We really don't have the right to know every skeleton in a man's closet just because he was or is a public servant.

If a parent sees signs of drug or alcohol abuse, then they should confront the board that supervises the coach and ask what policies for drug testing exist.

Otherwise, mind your own business.

kikablue

May 2, 2009 - 3:03 pm EDT

Very well said. To many people want to stick their noses in to other peoples business, and they need to be taking care of their own. My Mother always said if you want to find out something keep your eyes and ears open and your mouth shut and you'll learn a lot.

Theo

May 2, 2009 - 7:06 pm EDT

If the employee is discovered by a random drug test, he/she should be fired on the spot. If the employee brings his/her problem to his employer, the employer should work with him/her.

mikesus

May 2, 2009 - 8:55 pm EDT

You really have no clue. People can have a positive test and not be on ILLEGAL drugs. Its stupidity like this that creates zero tolerance policies.

Did you know that taking an antibiotic could get you a positive on a cocaine test? Should we fire someone for taking an antibiotic?

This is the same line of thinking that has led to school kids getting expelled for having Motrin...

When will people learn?

Panacea

May 3, 2009 - 12:04 am EDT

People really do have no clue. Good point on the fact that many prescription medications, over the counter medications, and herbal supplements can cause false positives.

Firing someone on the spot is a complete waste of time.

Treatment is the answer. I have known many substance abusers who have been able to successfully return to their jobs after treatment.

It's also important to keep in mind rising PRESCRIPTION drug abuse: oxycontin, vicodin, percocet, and so on. Many, many people abuse legal, prescription medications. The only difference between these folks and a crack addict, is the prescription drug abuser goes to a doctor's office to get his supply and not a crack house.

We have to get off this holier than thou, vindictive, punishment mindset.

bettejayne

May 3, 2009 - 1:51 am EDT

What is wrong with you people? We are talking about POLICE,EMT's, and FIREMEN. These are people who have your life in their hands just as much as a heart surgeon would. Do you want someone on crack working on your heart?, coming in your house to check on a prowler call?,to fight a fire? These people, some are sworn to abide by the laws of the local, state, and federal systems. I know we are brainwashed by some people to accept the lowest common denominator but there has to be some common sense applied.

james2000

May 4, 2009 - 1:07 pm EDT

The same common sense that assumes all people who test positive are crack addicts, I'm sure.

Paul J

May 3, 2009 - 7:27 am EDT

Drug and alcohol addiction is an illness. IS NOT, IT IS A CHOICE.
If a cop tests positive on the job he should be fired with no recourse. This would prove him dishonest.
He should be held at a standard 10 times above regular citizens.
Lets quit making excuses for people and hold them accountable, then thing would change.

james2000

May 5, 2009 - 3:44 pm EDT

I appreciate the irony that this person asks a question about transparency in knowing who tests positive for drugs, yet requests that their name be witheld in asking the question.