Passenger Trains > # of US railworkers testing positive drug use skyrockets

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/trafficandcommuting/number-of-us-railroad-workers-testing-positive-for-drug-use-skyrockets/2016/09/14/6966f6ce-7abc-11e6-ac8e-cf8e0dd91dc7_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-more-top-stories_rail-drugs-817pm%3Ahomepage%2Fstory

This is bad news.
These employees have some of the best jobs in the country, not subject to off-shoring, with benefits.
What are they thinking?  That life always is fun and easy? 
It is work, hard work, and a fair trade for the pay.
The fundamental lesson I learned on the SP back in 1985-87, when we made a wildly unpopular initiative to reduce collision fatalities and other disasters related to drug and alcohol use, was this:
It is not so much the chemical effect of the drug on a person's abilities, it is the choice made by a risk-taking employee who chooses to violate the drug rules that is unacceptable because choosing to be unsafe is a consistent behavior.  If you break that rule you are probably cutting corners everywhere and eventually will hurt yourself and others.
Of course gross impairment after drug or alcohol use is also a part of the problem in the later stages of an employee's downward spiral.
This policy by the SP was almost universally despised until Ricky Gates gave us an advanced course on the problem and it's consequences, now it is universally accepted.
For those who don't know, Mr. Gates went on to serve time and then emerged from his sentance to become a strong safety and drug control advocate, doing all one man can do to make the world a better place and atone for his lapses.  If I can't convince readers, maybe he can.

It's very tough to shake friends who are in a drug or alcohol infused culture. And sometimes it can get very hard to recognise you're a drink or toke over the line.

Pain meds, serious injury recovery, people can make bad choices.

Tough choices, but we're adults.

Posted from Android

I'd like to see some breakdown of what drugs are being detected, and at what levels, before concluding that this is a serious change.  The way it's presented in this article, I can't tell if it's a real problem or another case of journalistic scare-mongering. 

As noted elsewhere, canabis is now legal in a bunch of states, either for medical applications or recreationally.  And it is well known that a postive test for THC is absolutely NOT an indication of actual impairment.  The buzz (or the pain relief effect) wears off in a matter of hours, but the chemical can be detected literally weeks later.  Did some of these people vacation in Colorado a couple weeks back?

The case with opiods is the one I would seriously be worried about.  My personal experience is such that I wouldn't go to work when I've used an opioid pain med, simply because I didn't like to drive when I'd taken one.  And my post-surgery prescription was perfectly legal (and low dose, to boot).  With all of the tales of pill-swapping going around, the notion of riding a 90 mph train, with one guy in the cab who may be a little loopy or taking someting he doesn't have prior experience with, THAT is scary.

Yet the current resident of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave thinks sentencing for many was too harsh.  Most of the illicit drugs come across the border, both borders, or via container ship.  Then there is the illegal multiple re-entry of felons, sanctuary cities.
​So at least work to reduce the drugs coming across,  you must make a decision as to what will happen over the next four years.

​There are other factors causing accidents, age, poor physical condition, texting, cellphones, etc etc etc.  Can't blame it all on drug usage.

There's plenty of home grown weed, and locally produced meth to go around. Unfortunately.

Good jobs are going begging in this country becasue of applicants who can't pass drug tests. We even have a guy running for president (Johnston) who is an admitted long-time marijuana user.
 

Bill Deaver
Tehachapi, CA

march_hare Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'd like to see some breakdown of what drugs are
> being detected, and at what levels, before
> concluding that this is a serious change.  The
> way it's presented in this article, I can't tell
> if it's a real problem or another case of
> journalistic scare-mongering. 
>
> As noted elsewhere, canabis is now legal in a
> bunch of states, either for medical applications
> or recreationally.  And it is well known that a
> postive test for THC is absolutely NOT an
> indication of actual impairment.  The buzz (or
> the pain relief effect) wears off in a matter of
> hours, but the chemical can be detected literally
> weeks later.  Did some of these people vacation
> in Colorado a couple weeks back?
>
> The case with opiods is the one I would seriously
> be worried about.  My personal experience is such
> that I wouldn't go to work when I've used an
> opioid pain med, simply because I didn't like to
> drive when I'd taken one.  And my post-surgery
> prescription was perfectly legal (and low dose, to
> boot).  With all of the tales of pill-swapping
> going around, the notion of riding a 90 mph train,
> with one guy in the cab who may be a little loopy
> or taking someting he doesn't have prior
> experience with, THAT is scary.

So it's okay if I have 5 beers before work, hey, it's legal

One more perspective:  I was from my downsized from my previous employer (mid year 2015) and was recently hired for a position in my field.  I worked for my previous employer for 28 years.  When you are forced to seek new employment and have been out of the 'application process' for the majority of your working years it is eye opening how the drug and alcohol aspect for employement is scrutized.  Many times, subsequent to a prelimnary interview, the applicant would have to complete an online 'self assessment' questionnaire.  Not having done somethihg like this, pretty much ever, I was expecting questions regarding my qualifications for the job itself.  This was a far cry from what the questions actually were.  A conservative estimate of probably 70% of these multiple choice questions revolved around drug / alcohol use.  I was simply flabergassted.  When you look at a self assessment question, and this is part of a job application approval process, and the question inquires as to how often you use heroin.....I mean....REALLY?  Heroin?
(I still shake my head in disbelief at that experience.)

survivor Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------


> So it's okay if I have 5 beers before work, hey,
> it's legal

Depends on how long before work you had the beers.  In aviation, I think the rule is still 8 hours bottle to throttle.  That's what it was back when I was flying around in helicopters.  Not sure what the standard is for rails, I assume anything that looks like impairment means you're gone (and rightly so).  Is the standard based on blood alcohol content, like driving?  Is it zero tolerance for BAC, or someting like .08 or .05 like it is for driving?  Somebody on this board must know.

 Air crews, bus drivers, railroad engineers and OBS, as well as the respective equipment maintenance, and support personnel of such industries have uncommon, yet highly-crucial responsibilities in the workplace and to our society...

IMO, if one is not operating a vehicle at such time, getting "ripped on the weekend" is one's personal business.  However, when it is time to suit up for the job, one must take personal responsibility to be focused and legal.  As an example, there is a reference in the pilot profession: "Twelve hours from bottle to throttle".  It isn't obtrusive, or impersonal, or racist or whatever...  It is there to diplomatically encourage, and demand accountability for air crews to be ready and alert.  When they walk into the cockpit, they are to be all business.  The same applies to flight attendants and terminal service personnel.

The abuse of alcohol and prescription/non-prescribed narcotic substances by some employees in the transportation industry is on the increase.  There should be greater accountability by credentialing authorities, and a zero tolerance initiative to ensure best practices.  Such best practices should also include a method for adequate support to personnel who are "on the edge" and require guidance.

I haven't been employed by a railroad for 19 years (don't miss it, wouldn't go back, although that's irrelevant now). In my experience at the time, demoralized employees were a far greater hazard than drug use or alcohol use. I worked with guys who were injured and even killed because they just weren't interested any more. I knew many more who wound up doing dangerous stuff because they weren't paying attention because they didn't care any more. Even in my own attempt to be meticulous, careful, knowledgeable, and professional, I found it difficult to do because it made me a target and it didn't really matter if the job was done well or correctly (or more accurately, doing it correctly was let's say, frowned upon).

However, demoralizing employees is not against the law. Being a demoralized employee is not against the law. They have no problem with all sorts of drug testing. I'm sure that some psychologist somewhere can develop a test for demoralized employees, but don't expect to see it. It's not like drug use or being drunk, so nobody cares.

TAW

I wonder how much of these are drugs, alcohol, vs prescription drugs? The other issue is that folks can't take off to have a drink or two. I was just off dealing with kidney stones and had to make sure that if I took pain meds to get through the stents or surgery, I wasn't going to work. That being said, I fought with marking off sick, off duty illness, etc. The railroad's new attendence policies don't help. Railroaders are just like lots of other guys out there in all industries. I know a dispatcher who has been off twice now for mj. Once he was caught on a random and the other, he asked for help. I have no doubt he wasn't on duty high. Same with a the guys who go home, drink a few beers, and then the railroad chain gangs them and they drive in, most likely sober, but we have a zero tolerance policy. .04 is legal to drive. it's also going to get you fired.

Joe

Curious if age has something to do with this too.  Younger people just don't seem to have the fear of using the wide range of drugs now available, be it perscription or otherwise.  In northern NJ heroin use is through the roof and there seem to be weekly tragedies in the new related to it.

In my non railroad employment we have regular screenings for drug use.  When you are a new hire and random tests depending upon your job role.  No illegal drugs in your system and you need a perscription for anything else that may show up.  There is a strict rule about drinking too.  For our CDL holders if you get called an blow anything above a zero in the breathalizer you are taken off the road.   Second time, rehab, and third time you are canned.

joeygooganelli Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> That
> being said, I fought with marking off sick, off
> duty illness, etc. The railroad's new attendence
> policies don't help.

Backup, in part, for my point.

TAW

Part of the problem is that -- compared to the military --the current  railroad random drug testing is not extensive or credible.  

For example, at one time the military tested  a random 10% of members a month (usually based on last diget of SSN) AND did at least one unscheduled "unit sweep" (100% of members) each year.  So every service member was tested AT least TWICE a year, and the testing program was credible. 

By comparision, FRA requires that railroads test between 25-50% each year, and IMO this testing is not credible.  If testing were not random, 25% would mean on average you would be tested once every four years...and randomness means some are tested more often -- I once tested the same train crew twice in a 30 day period -- and others less.  Ask yourself if being tested every FOUR YEARS (or two at the highest test rate) is credible.  The numbers say it is not.

Simple solution: go to increased testing like the military.  You'll flush out the users and then the numbers will go down.  BTW I once served on a ship in Norfolk that had a drug problem and was testing 10% a week.  
The word was out on the waterfront: "If you do drugs and get ordered to the USS (ship) don't bother to unpack your seabag, because you won't be aboard that long!"  The number of positive tests spiked and then went to zero.

PS Here's a link to an IG report on Amtrak crew drug use back in 2012: 
https://www.amtrakoig.gov/report-records/audit-reports/railroad-safety-amtrak-not-adequately-addressing-rising-drug-and  



Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 09/16/16 12:13 by hazegray.

NYC4096 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>  Air crews, bus drivers, railroad engineers and OBS, as well as the respective equipment
> maintenance, and support personnel of such industries have uncommon, yet highly-crucial
> responsibilities in the workplace and to our society...
>
For the record, OBS employees are NOT subject to random drug testing; engineers and trainmen (essentially hours-of-service employees) are. 

Drug has become such a problem that employers are having trouble hiring clean workers.  I have a friend that works for an employment agency and he says that they have to reject over half the applicants because they test positive for drugs.  Employers don't want people driving forklifts while high.  They don't want to hire a machine operator that might be high when he gets a finger in the wrong spot while operating a stamping machine.  There is too much liability.  Also, someone that is careless with drugs is going to be careless with his job.

UPS in Louisville has their major air hub for the nation.  They are having such a problem getting employees that they have stopped the drug test for workers on the sort line.  Still, they have so much problem that they are offering $100 a week bonus to employees that show up for work all five days of the work week and they still can't get people to show up for work.  With pay  around $10/hr, insurance, and college tuition paid, they just can't get the workers.  I suspect that some of them are recovering from a hangover or strung out on drugs.  Young people just out of high school complain about no jobs.  The problem is, they don't want to work, they want to do a joint and chill out.



For jobs like those on the railroad, airlines, trucking, and other transportation industries, all of us are threatened when those operators are not 100% sober.  That 10,000 ton train hauling chemicals through you town, the truck loaded with gasoline, the airliner with passengers (maybe you or a family member) put all of us in danger.  I support no tolerance in this field.  I also support treatment programs.  People make mistakes but with treatment, they deserve a second chance.  This is a problem that is only going to get worse.

In the Kentucky, Indiana, and Ohio area in the last month, there has been some heroin laced with a drug used to sedate elephants.  The police and EMS are using up to 6 doses of Narcan or Naloxone and still loosing victims.  

John
 

      Yet the railroads ( some at least (( UP ))  ) continue to hire the people in classes that give the most ignorant answers to questions. When I applied one of the Einstein guys answered that his job would be to shovel the coal to make the engine go faster ! And I bet he is an executive by now.   So what do they expect?
 

There are many posts on this site about folks getting up and walking out of rail hiring sessions when the drug policy is laid out.

Posted from Android