is this unfair?

[honeybee13]

Glad you have a sense of humour, it goes a long way on this forum.

[surreyguy]

We just cant decide on whether or not it would be a good idea to contact the testing company and raise a grievance with them ?

 

Would it do any good anyhow ?

 

What can they do about things now ......not an awful lot i imagine!

 

Tell you what though , when this situation is over i intend to name and shame the company!!! They pride themselves on being the "ultimate" in workplace alcohol and drug testing , unbeaten by others.......I will take out an article in the local papers to make people aware of how shoddy their customer care is!!

[surreyguy]

your not allowed to type the word p**s on here ???

 

My word , its lucky i didnt come on here to post on the day my girlfriend got tested or the day she got dismissed................an example of how that post WOULD have looked............

 

*************************** and today ********** ***** *** ******* ********* ***** and then she said **** ****** ***** ***** so girlfried said **** **** ***** ******** *** ****** so i did ***** ***** ***** ******...

 

Would you all have got my drift????

[elpulpo]

We just cant decide on whether or not it would be a good idea to contact the testing company and raise a grievance with them ?

 

Would it do any good anyhow ?

 

What can they do about things now ......not an awful lot i imagine!

 

Tell you what though , when this situation is over i intend to name and shame the company!!! They pride themselves on being the "ultimate" in workplace alcohol and drug testing , unbeaten by others.......I will take out an article in the local papers to make people aware of how shoddy their customer care is!!

The liability, from your point of view, lies with the former employer. If they contract this matter to the testing company, and that company makes a mess of it , the employer is liable.

I'd suggest you look into the drug testing company and see if they are affiliated to any professional body. You might be able to submit a complaint to them.

[mariefab]

A little light reading for you.

 

Drug Testing False Positives - Drug Test False positive with marijuana and other drugs

 

Blood and Urine Drug Testing for Cannabinoids

 

Rise in drug testing of employees

 

ICO - The Employment Practices Code

Scroll down to 4.4

[surreyguy]

TO Mariefab.

 

Thanks ever so much for the links , greatly appreciated !

 

The link to the ICO website , we had already viewed that one and found it really interesting. My girlfriend was told on NUMEROUS occasions that she was picked at random for testing . She asked them many times and they told her it was RANDOM every time ! It was only the investigating officer chairing the appeal who confirmed that the test was conducted because of a "tip off" . The ICO states that it is "deceptive and unfair to allow an employee to believe that the test conducted is genuinly random when infact it is being conducted for any other reason"

 

The company have tried to cover their backs by saying (and this is also stated in their alcohol and drugs poilicy) that they RANDOMLY test 10% of the entire work force every year......but they HAVE NOT done this.....in the past 2 years they have tested only 3 people randomly so they obviously stick to the procedure only when it suits THEM !

 

thanks again guys.

[honeybee13]

Hi there. I just read the same ICO document, very interesting Mariefab.

 

Surreyman, I thought exactly the same as you - the company seems have ignored more guidelines than it followed, including that the criteria for choosing random people to test should be fair.

 

This can't look good for them. One of Marie's other links talks about employers using a drug test result to make staff redundant on the cheap, which could be the case.

 

When I asked about a subject access request, I was thinking about documentation of the company's testing procedures, how many people were tested and how they were selected. This would cost you £10, but I think you could throw in any other queries you need documents for. Is this right, guys?

 

How are you both feeling today? I have to say I've never seen anyone go to 3 pages of posts this quickly, so you have a lot of support.

 

Please keep posting.

 

My best, HB

[kurvaface]

The sample that remains can be tested for a DNA profile.

[jackieandwayne]

When you get done for drink driving (this used to be the case - I remember with my dad) you are entitled to have half the blood test - I remember my dad having it in the fridge at home. So, I would assume it is no different to this urine sample which is being held somewhere - you should be entitled to have it back to haveit tested privately if you wish. No need to tell them you intend to have it DNA'd. But that sample is a vital piece of evidence for you. In fact, I should arrange to have it couriered straight into the hands of your solicitor, and he arrange for this, not you, you don;t go anywhere near it.

 

And I think you should go and have the extended drug tests done if only to help your poor girlfriend, this has clearly affected her badly and it will help her to see it in black and white - that she is quite innocent. As well as another good piece of evidence later. If she is on the point of a breakdown, hopefully she is not, you wouldn't believe the things that can get struck in some people's mind when in a state, and at least having this in black and white will help to bolster her along a bit.

 

Keep your chins up both of you, I thought my case was bad, but this is ten times worse!

 

have bookmarked thread - jkeep posting, and get that girlfriend to start getting very very angry instead of distressed!

[honeybee13]

Quite right, Jackieandwayne. Don't get mad, get even, surreyguy.

[surreyguy]

Thanks guys , you lot are so amazing!

 

The support is appreciated so much by both of us.

 

Ok , after some of your suggestions i will repeat what the employer has told us.....

 

We CAN have the remaining portion of the sample re-tested if we want , it will be at our own expense BUT.......The employer say THEY have the final say in which lab carries out the re-test (owing to the fact that these 2 labs are close(ish) by and they are accredited) . This kinda blows our ideas of DNA testing out of the water !

 

Also , on the day of the test , my girlfriend was provided with a "schedule of procedure for testing" which basically is a procedure the testing agent has to follow during testing.....there is a section in this which states QUOTE " WHILST CONDUCTING THE TESTING PROCEDURE ON A DONOR , THE SAMPLE OF URINE PROVIDED MUST REMAIN WITHIN CLEAR SIGHT OF THE DONOR . THE COLLECTION AGENT SHOULD NEVER PLACE THE SAMPLE IN ANY POSITION OF WHICH THE DONOR DOES NOT HAVE FULL VIEW.

 

Well , surely this procedure was broken owing to the fact that my girlfriend thinks( she is 99% sure) that when the collection agent went outside the room he had it in his hand (she had ONLY just handed it to him when he got called away).

 

The testing procedure also CLEARLY states ;

 

Quote ; "WHILST ANY TESTING AGENT IS PERFORMING ANY TESTING PROCEDURE ON A DONOR , THE TESTING AGENT MUST REMAIN INSIDE THE TESTING ARENA (or any area being used as such) . STRICTLY UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES SHOULD THE TESTING AGENT LEAVE THE AREA OF TESTING UNTIL THE PROCEDURE HAS BEEN COMPLETED AND THE DONOR HAS (firstly) LEFT THE ROOM.

 

there are also a couple of MINOR procedures the agent has failed to stick to but none as major as the ones above!!

 

Im beginning to wonder has my girlfriend got it the wrong way round...as in did SHE have the "newly trained" collection agent doing HER sample and not the other way round as she first thought....

 

 

Just as a for your info...we HAVE contacted the testing company but they refuse to accept ANY responsibilty owing to the fact that they claim their agent has not broken any procedures....

[Bigredbus]

Hi 'surreyguy',

 

Hope that all the information in these posts are of some help to your case and that your girlfriend is feeling less stressed after reading them.

 

May I ask when your ET1 has been served?

[Bigredbus]

Thanks guys , you lot are so amazing!

 

The support is appreciated so much by both of us.

 

Ok , after some of your suggestions i will repeat what the employer has told us.....

 

We CAN have the remaining portion of the sample re-tested if we want , it will be at our own expense BUT.......The employer say THEY have the final say in which lab carries out the re-test (owing to the fact that these 2 labs are close(ish) by and they are accredited) . This kinda blows our ideas of DNA testing out of the water !

 

Also , on the day of the test , my girlfriend was provided with a "schedule of procedure for testing" which basically is a procedure the testing agent has to follow during testing.....there is a section in this which states QUOTE " WHILST CONDUCTING THE TESTING PROCEDURE ON A DONOR , THE SAMPLE OF URINE PROVIDED MUST REMAIN WITHIN CLEAR SIGHT OF THE DONOR . THE COLLECTION AGENT SHOULD NEVER PLACE THE SAMPLE IN ANY POSITION OF WHICH THE DONOR DOES NOT HAVE FULL VIEW.

 

Well , surely this procedure was broken owing to the fact that my girlfriend thinks( she is 99% sure) that when the collection agent went outside the room he had it in his hand (she had ONLY just handed it to him when he got called away).

 

The testing procedure also CLEARLY states ;

 

Quote ; "WHILST ANY TESTING AGENT IS PERFORMING ANY TESTING PROCEDURE ON A DONOR , THE TESTING AGENT MUST REMAIN INSIDE THE TESTING ARENA (or any area being used as such) . STRICTLY UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES SHOULD THE TESTING AGENT LEAVE THE AREA OF TESTING UNTIL THE PROCEDURE HAS BEEN COMPLETED AND THE DONOR HAS (firstly) LEFT THE ROOM.

 

there are also a couple of MINOR procedures the agent has failed to stick to but none as major as the ones above!!

 

Im beginning to wonder has my girlfriend got it the wrong way round...as in did SHE have the "newly trained" collection agent doing HER sample and not the other way round as she first thought....

 

 

Just as a for your info...we HAVE contacted the testing company but they refuse to accept ANY responsibilty owing to the fact that they claim their agent has not broken any procedures....

 

They obviously are in breach of the chain of custody by leaving the testing area... and despite their refusal to accept any responsibility in this case, I would nevertheless send a complaint... mentioning their negligence...

[elpulpo]

I'd suggest that you seek a free, initial consultation with an employment law solicitor. With a few, if possible.

It's crucial that you get the remaining sample tested to substantiate that it's not yours. Have you asked that the sample be DNA tested?

[surreyguy]

Thank all .

 

The emplyer received the ET1 20 days ago (told to us by the tribunal office) so they have only another 8 days to respond but in saying that , the employer already told my girlfriend during the appeal hearing (my girlfriend got really upset and was crying and told the employer that she would be taking this to tribunal) that they were entirely within their rights to terminate her employment owing to the fact that she broke health and safety rules BY WAY OF INTOXICATION , they say that warrants summary dismissal and that my girlfriend was well within her rights to take it to tribunal BUT that as they had followed procedure TO THE LETTER (LOL thats a joke!) they had absolutly NOTHING to fear and so would defend the case all the way to hearing!

 

 

Girlfriend says to tell you lot a sincere thanks from her . Shes gone to see her mum at the minute , her mums just recovering from surgery for breast cancer.......so this isnt exactly what the family need right now...

[Bigredbus]

Bless her... I am sure that all caggers send their warmest wishes for a prompt and full remission... and your girlfriend being in the right, I would not bulge one step...

 

As 'elpulpo' mentioned, try to get that remaining sample DNA tested... If my memory serves, there is a lab called 'Gentrack' who could be of some help here...

 

They will have to explain how they understand the expression 'to the letter' as they failed to test randomly... and the lab has failed its duty to preserve the integrity of the sample by breaching the chain of custody...

 

All the best to you and your girlfriend 'surreyguy'... we are all close behind you...

[elpulpo]

Do you have a copy of the company's policy regarding the drug testing?

And just to reconfirm, you have their written admission that they tested her specifically because of a 'tip off', contrary to the company's randon testing policy?

[surreyguy]

Thanks all .

 

BRB - going to look into the GENTRACK website and take it from there , THERE IS NO WAY IM GIVING UP ON THIS , im going to get my girlfriend through this one way or the other because i know she hasnt done anything wrong !!

 

20 years we are together and i have every faith in her

 

Elpulpo - yes we have a copy of the alcohol and drugs policy but it states in there that tests can be conducted:

 

Pre - employment (which is strictly adhered to , ALL new employee's ARE tested )

 

For cause - when an accident or incident occurs which leads management to belief that the employee is under the influence of alcohol or drugs. (which doesnt get adhered to owing to an employee having quite a serious accident in December and yet he definatley WASNT drug tested.)

 

Random/un-announced - The company will test 10% of all employee's on a totally RANDOM basis in any given 12 month period. This applies to ALL staff whether in a role deemed safety critical or not (this 10% testing is NOT adhered to as girlfriend requested these figures during the appeal process and out of a workforce of 72 , only 3 (THREE) people have been RANDOMLY tested in the past 2 full years.

 

sO....NOT ONLY HAVE THE TESTING COMPANY DRIFTED AWAY FROM PROCEDURE , IT APPEARS THE EMPLOYER HAS DONE THE SAME !!!

 

 

seems these ccompanies/employers stick to procedure ONLY when it suits them !

[Bigredbus]

While she is off to her mum, let us call the devil in...

 

a) she is told that a random drug testing is to take place and she has been selected...

b) as she has nothing to fear, she voluntarily agrees to be tested...

c) test takes place under the responsibility of an independant laboratory...

d) both technicians leave the testing area prior to her leaving, thus breaching the chain of custody...

e) the results are positive...

f) she is dismissed summarily...

 

...

 

What steps a reasonable employer could have taken here?

 

Is summary dismissal justified?

 

Have policies, both in terms of testing and disciplinary procedures, been followed?

 

She was adamant that the sample was not hers... should have the employer allow a re-test? and why?

Edited March 18, 2010 by Bigredbus
Typo...

[honeybee13]

Well, a reasonable employer would have

 

let her take the test again on the day

 

held a proper hearing and followed disc procedures

 

agreed to a testing lab of her choice, not trying to control how it happens.

 

 

I doubt if procedures were followed in either situation.

 

Yes, I think the employer should have allowed a re-test, given the gravity of the accusation.

 

How's that for starters? Where are we heading with this please, BRB?

 

My best, HB

 

btw, forgive my ignorance, but what is the shield that you have as an avatar?

[elpulpo]

The company does reserve the right then to test an employee if they feel they have cause to, but they didn't express that prior to the test.

They essentially duped her into a test by stating it was random. Then, at the appeal admitted that an accusation had been made against her.

It could be argued that the test was inadmissable, apart from anything else, as it was carried out under false pretences.

[Bigredbus]

Hi dear 'honeybee13',

 

This is the coat of arms for Chelsea, London...

[honeybee13]

Aaah, I see. Anything to do with a local football team?

[Bigredbus]

Hi hi hi...

 

Not in the slightest... I am not a football person... in fact I do not like football...

[elpulpo]

Well, yeh. A Chelsea fan then.