Drug abuse

[stevekingsman]

After the pilot was arrested from the cockpit onsuspicion that he was drunk. It has made me think how do NATs make sure they are not employing people who abuse alcohol and drugs.
I understand that there is drug screening prior to employment but this is in the form of a urine test which does not give an accurate account of previous drug use ( except maybe cannabis ).
Shouldn't they use blood tests?
I currently work as a drugs awareness officer, visiting schools and would like to know whether there are breathalizers outside control towers etc or do you think there should be.
A drug user, for example ecstacy. Would be detected in urine for a very short amount of time where as a blood test or hair sample would be able to pick up use up to 90 days in the past.
These tests are expensive but don't you think they should be used, considering the responsiblity that comes with ATC?
I'd like to know what people think on this.:confused:

[5milesbaby]

As we work in teams, and very often at the bigger units the team will be different every time, some reliance is made on those around being able to detect abuse. The nature of the job dictates that with responsibilities being so high, something will be said to the right person if needed (and occasionally a refusal to work with said person). Perhaps the tests should be more regular and not just the urine test, however everything seems to be ok as the safety records still look good, a obvious indication.

[AirNoServicesAustralia]

My observations as a controller, is that we as a group take the job too seriously to ever turn up to work under the influence of any drug, alcohol or otherwise. Of course caffiene and nicotine are notable exceptions which are in fact a neccesary part of the preparation for a morning or night shift, myself included!

I think drug tests would be an unneccesary invasion of privacy, unless of course there is a big screw up, then as in a car crash, it would be expected that a urine test would be conducted. Blood tests to find traces of drug use from 90 days earlier is frought with danger, as the individual may have been in Amsterdam as an example and quite legally indulged in a bit of "choof", yet have their career put at risk.