drug & booze testing
Bottums Up
Didn't the Victorian coppers have serious egg on their faces some years ago, when they introduced random drug testing, and allowed the first positive test bloke's face to plastered all through the media.
It later turned out to be a false positive as I recall.
Bit late when one's been humiliated on national TV!
It later turned out to be a false positive as I recall.
Bit late when one's been humiliated on national TV!
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The interesting bit is what protocols are they using?
In an earlier life as a union leader, we discussed this with DOT, when the US FAA anounced that they had the rights to test anyone associated with flights from OZ to the US.
When asked what safety was built into the checks we drew a blank. We suggested as a minimum we use the same protocol as sports checks which includes 2 sealed samples, one for them and one for you. That way if their sample comes up positive you have evidence if their sample is tampered with. The Yanks didn't like that idea and suggested that we didn't trust them.
Nothing then came of it then, but I think the same still stands. Sports testing is down to a fine art and I think the same process must be given to us. The sportspersons are only playing games, we are dealing with reality.
Wunwing
In an earlier life as a union leader, we discussed this with DOT, when the US FAA anounced that they had the rights to test anyone associated with flights from OZ to the US.
When asked what safety was built into the checks we drew a blank. We suggested as a minimum we use the same protocol as sports checks which includes 2 sealed samples, one for them and one for you. That way if their sample comes up positive you have evidence if their sample is tampered with. The Yanks didn't like that idea and suggested that we didn't trust them.
Nothing then came of it then, but I think the same still stands. Sports testing is down to a fine art and I think the same process must be given to us. The sportspersons are only playing games, we are dealing with reality.
Wunwing
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1,569
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes 'CC' that's right there was a huge fiasco about that drug tested guy who got 'plasterd' in more ways than one ! We are all human even the ones doing the testing & we know from experience that CASA have a track record of stuffing things up big time! The biggest defence to all that are exposed to be tested will simply be don't have anything in yr system anytime yr in charge of a plane, but then again we are talking about humans here and the way we kill each other like flies on this planet this little challenge for us will pale into insignificance!
Stay alert guys/gals, more to come am sure!
CW
P.S.....sorry "wiz" I guess when someone from the 'west' see the word booze it's
all round
Stay alert guys/gals, more to come am sure!
CW
P.S.....sorry "wiz" I guess when someone from the 'west' see the word booze it's
all round
On the back page of the propoganda sheet, it states that "the rate of false positives in oral fluid testing is very low. Apropriate confirmatory testing is conducted in a laboratory.
So if I get a false positive I need to wait a couple of days to be cleared. That's a fair while for the pax to wait....
So if I get a false positive I need to wait a couple of days to be cleared. That's a fair while for the pax to wait....
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would of thought something like this would have been in a long time ago actually....
Like others i wonder how this will be conducted.
Will it take into consideration the described drugs in the theory book. Antibiotics Analgesics, Antihistamines, Amphetamines(cold &flu) or will it be more like a road test for the main used indulgence drugs.
Also i would like to raise how this will be done as to not flying, pre and post flight? Can someone be Airside and not flying but have medication in them? i know its mainly common sense but i am sure these points may be argued if people are screened >: "yeah i have booze or cold and flu medication in my system but i wasn't going to fly anywhere etc etc". In this case it may take actual company's to get involved.
Its not like there going to have road/airblocks or pull up random planes in the air to catch people in the act. Also post flight you would have thought is chasing the problem after the fact?
Like others i wonder how this will be conducted.
Will it take into consideration the described drugs in the theory book. Antibiotics Analgesics, Antihistamines, Amphetamines(cold &flu) or will it be more like a road test for the main used indulgence drugs.
Also i would like to raise how this will be done as to not flying, pre and post flight? Can someone be Airside and not flying but have medication in them? i know its mainly common sense but i am sure these points may be argued if people are screened >: "yeah i have booze or cold and flu medication in my system but i wasn't going to fly anywhere etc etc". In this case it may take actual company's to get involved.
Its not like there going to have road/airblocks or pull up random planes in the air to catch people in the act. Also post flight you would have thought is chasing the problem after the fact?
Last edited by dj Mcrae; 17th May 2008 at 07:45. Reason: a little spelling tweak ;)
Bottums Up
I suspect all need to be concerned.
I suspect some will be more worried than others.
I suspect a lawyer's number handy in the phone might be a sign of forethought. A false positive may lead one to answer a question, in good faith, the answer later found to be incorrect, and then one is dealing with perjury. Given that "they" locked up Haneef for quite some time on no charges or evidence, one couldn't be sure that one's rights don't get trampled in the zealous race for a score.
As an aside, I tried to give a friendly word or two of advice to a flight attendant the other day. We were both off duty, and she mentioned how she'd flown at some stage with a hangover.
I suspect that the reason she wouldn't believe me that it is an offence to be aircrew if one's capacity to act is diminished, is because she's a Y-Gen and I'm an old farte, and it doesn't say so in the FA Manual.
I suspect some will be more worried than others.
I suspect a lawyer's number handy in the phone might be a sign of forethought. A false positive may lead one to answer a question, in good faith, the answer later found to be incorrect, and then one is dealing with perjury. Given that "they" locked up Haneef for quite some time on no charges or evidence, one couldn't be sure that one's rights don't get trampled in the zealous race for a score.
As an aside, I tried to give a friendly word or two of advice to a flight attendant the other day. We were both off duty, and she mentioned how she'd flown at some stage with a hangover.
I suspect that the reason she wouldn't believe me that it is an offence to be aircrew if one's capacity to act is diminished, is because she's a Y-Gen and I'm an old farte, and it doesn't say so in the FA Manual.
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: AUS
Posts: 356
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
'She mentioned how at some stage she had flown with a hangover'. 'Gen Y'.
Shocking absolutely shocking!
Who knows where this nonsense will take us or if indeed flight crew will be targeted over the easy pickings of ground crew going to work airside through a turnstyle gate.
Nothing I have seen indicates what funding will be allocated. Not much if the Education Program to proceed the implementation that we have been hearing about for the past three years is anything to go by.
Five minutes of web search throws up all sorts of worry. Everyday drugs used for everyday human conditions can cause crossover false positives on saliva tests. Tea totals who eat a lot of fruit can register higher than .02 BAC
Chain of custody for samples, advice of your rights, will you be charged with a Commonwealth Offence?
Some Education campaign!
Shocking absolutely shocking!
Who knows where this nonsense will take us or if indeed flight crew will be targeted over the easy pickings of ground crew going to work airside through a turnstyle gate.
Nothing I have seen indicates what funding will be allocated. Not much if the Education Program to proceed the implementation that we have been hearing about for the past three years is anything to go by.
Five minutes of web search throws up all sorts of worry. Everyday drugs used for everyday human conditions can cause crossover false positives on saliva tests. Tea totals who eat a lot of fruit can register higher than .02 BAC
Chain of custody for samples, advice of your rights, will you be charged with a Commonwealth Offence?
Some Education campaign!
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 705
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AS4308 The drug testing standard
D and A testing will be conducted in accordance with this standard so I suggest that anybody having a concern read this before getting too carried away. In very recent times I helped introduce drug and alcohol testing to an aviation workplace as a contract requirement not a legislated requirement. Overwhelmingly the workforce concerned welcomed the testing as the feeling was "I want to be happy that person I am working with is not under the influence of drugs or alcohol." Our testing was based on the traditional breath testing for alcohol and urinalysis for drugs as there was no standard for saliva testing at that stage. That has now changed.
The program was preceded by an education campaign to allow users to get clean. (anything up to 4-5 weeks for THC).
Then the whole workforce was tested to under a no penalty protocol to establish the extent of random testing required. As there were no positives this was set at 50% of the workforce/annum.
If you read the standard there are strict chain of evidence requirements imposed. If there is a break in the chain the sample is void.
As a rule there is no penalty attached to an initial positive test. That only kicks in after a positive test is confirmed. That doesn't mean an individual would not be stood down on full pay pending the confirmation test as a safety precaution.
If you think you may be under the influence DON'T WORK. If you are taking over-the counter medication , declare it to your employer. Pseudoephedrine found in cold and flue medications will test as ephedrine until the sample is tested by gas chromotography to reveal a more definitive result. If you are prescribed medicine ask your doctor if it could adversely effect abiltiy to function in your particular workplace.
As professionals we submitted to regular tests and checks to confirm our ability to perform our jobs. These tests are just doing the same thing but in a different area of our professional lives. I hope this a help.
The program was preceded by an education campaign to allow users to get clean. (anything up to 4-5 weeks for THC).
Then the whole workforce was tested to under a no penalty protocol to establish the extent of random testing required. As there were no positives this was set at 50% of the workforce/annum.
If you read the standard there are strict chain of evidence requirements imposed. If there is a break in the chain the sample is void.
As a rule there is no penalty attached to an initial positive test. That only kicks in after a positive test is confirmed. That doesn't mean an individual would not be stood down on full pay pending the confirmation test as a safety precaution.
If you think you may be under the influence DON'T WORK. If you are taking over-the counter medication , declare it to your employer. Pseudoephedrine found in cold and flue medications will test as ephedrine until the sample is tested by gas chromotography to reveal a more definitive result. If you are prescribed medicine ask your doctor if it could adversely effect abiltiy to function in your particular workplace.
As professionals we submitted to regular tests and checks to confirm our ability to perform our jobs. These tests are just doing the same thing but in a different area of our professional lives. I hope this a help.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1,569
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tnxs 'fs' for that informative post.
What bothers me a little is the way these testers go about the task & how they intend to handle any results that may prove positive on first contact. I would hate to think that these guys/gals doing the testing will feel as if they are school yard bullies & treat professional people like pilots engineers etc as if criminals or lower than them. NOBODY likes being subjected to 'big brother' tactics in any format but obviously if no one has anything to hide then it's hopefully just an inconvenience. We shall see no doubt.
As a side to all this I wonder why now? We have had testing available for some years now for rd users. I can't help but wonder what brought this on for pilots, engineers & other airside pro staff to be tested at random now, anybody care to shed some light on that?
CW
What bothers me a little is the way these testers go about the task & how they intend to handle any results that may prove positive on first contact. I would hate to think that these guys/gals doing the testing will feel as if they are school yard bullies & treat professional people like pilots engineers etc as if criminals or lower than them. NOBODY likes being subjected to 'big brother' tactics in any format but obviously if no one has anything to hide then it's hopefully just an inconvenience. We shall see no doubt.
As a side to all this I wonder why now? We have had testing available for some years now for rd users. I can't help but wonder what brought this on for pilots, engineers & other airside pro staff to be tested at random now, anybody care to shed some light on that?
CW
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: On a Ship Near You
Posts: 787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes but what's the risk?
How often are people coming to work impaired? This alcohol/drug testing process isn't cheap. Millions of dollars are being spent just establishing the processes then millions more to keep it running.
The risk and subsequent testing regime on the roads is 'known'; well sort of. IMHO in the case of roads, you only keep the honest, honest for fear of getting caught.
One too many sherbets, oh I'll be all right, "what if I get caught" is the thought process, not "I could cause an accident".
Those who don't care or don't think about it still offend, hence the multiple offender stats; either significant problem which they can't address or simply not thinking of the consequences.
Surely, by now in this modern world we have processes in place to weed (pardon the pun) out offenders (in aviation) without needing to subject the 99%+ of people that wouldn't offend anyway to such a rubbish process. Hence the fear of 'false positives' and the commentary.
Do we worry about the consequence of false positives with the booze bus? Well no, cause it's not career ending; although it could be if there is a conviction.
My greater concern is the "real positives" that will be encountered by people taking cross counter medications, combinations that my be "real positives", but in no way impair judgement / fatigue / alertness / ability to perform. ie an absolutely honest mistake.
What if a "real positive" comes from medication prescribed by a DAME; used in the correct amounts according to the handbook?
Where is the education process? The "cross" medical examiner saying "cold and flu tablets + flying = could end your career" etc. The easily available list of banned drugs and how many hours between consumption and flying / controlling / tooling is ok?
What change in sick-leave will be attributed to the testing, to those otherwise fit for duty, being cautious because they tied one on 3 days earlier?
I believe that the FAA had random testing and after wasting huge amounts of money it's now targeted "tip off" testing only (allegedly).
How often are people coming to work impaired? This alcohol/drug testing process isn't cheap. Millions of dollars are being spent just establishing the processes then millions more to keep it running.
The risk and subsequent testing regime on the roads is 'known'; well sort of. IMHO in the case of roads, you only keep the honest, honest for fear of getting caught.
One too many sherbets, oh I'll be all right, "what if I get caught" is the thought process, not "I could cause an accident".
Those who don't care or don't think about it still offend, hence the multiple offender stats; either significant problem which they can't address or simply not thinking of the consequences.
Surely, by now in this modern world we have processes in place to weed (pardon the pun) out offenders (in aviation) without needing to subject the 99%+ of people that wouldn't offend anyway to such a rubbish process. Hence the fear of 'false positives' and the commentary.
Do we worry about the consequence of false positives with the booze bus? Well no, cause it's not career ending; although it could be if there is a conviction.
My greater concern is the "real positives" that will be encountered by people taking cross counter medications, combinations that my be "real positives", but in no way impair judgement / fatigue / alertness / ability to perform. ie an absolutely honest mistake.
What if a "real positive" comes from medication prescribed by a DAME; used in the correct amounts according to the handbook?
Where is the education process? The "cross" medical examiner saying "cold and flu tablets + flying = could end your career" etc. The easily available list of banned drugs and how many hours between consumption and flying / controlling / tooling is ok?
What change in sick-leave will be attributed to the testing, to those otherwise fit for duty, being cautious because they tied one on 3 days earlier?
I believe that the FAA had random testing and after wasting huge amounts of money it's now targeted "tip off" testing only (allegedly).
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 705
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CW
As to "Why Now?", I think for a couple of reason that there has been a fatality that even though drugs weren't attributable as causal in the accident, it demonstrate that they did exist in the pilot's system at the time of the accident. Even though in this case you couldn't say that it demonstrated a representative level of usage in the pilot community it does reinforce what others believe that the level of usage in the aviation community could be a concern. After all the level of usage has increased across the community and there is no evidence to suggest that that increase hasn't also occurred in the aviation community.
As an aside, in recent years there has been an increasing tendancy to cite organisation (management) failures that contribute accidents.i.e bad decisions in resourcing, funding etc. that have contributed to an accident. Will these managers also be tested to see if they are under the influence of drugs and alcohol when they make decisions?(from some of the decisions I have seen, you would think so!)
Lets hope they come under the spotlight as well. Presumably if they hold an ASIC they will. On the other hand they might just tend to stay away from airside more.
As an aside, in recent years there has been an increasing tendancy to cite organisation (management) failures that contribute accidents.i.e bad decisions in resourcing, funding etc. that have contributed to an accident. Will these managers also be tested to see if they are under the influence of drugs and alcohol when they make decisions?(from some of the decisions I have seen, you would think so!)
Lets hope they come under the spotlight as well. Presumably if they hold an ASIC they will. On the other hand they might just tend to stay away from airside more.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1,569
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
'FS' yr posts are quite informative, again tnxs.
It would be a fair chance that pilots over the years have stepped into the 'office' with some alcohol/drugs still in their system known or unknown. Like aircraft with contaminated fuel/oil it does happen at times & will continue happening as long as there are humans involved. Just how we handle these future events by way of random testing etc is the area in question & also how to educate so that the risk is kept to an absolute minimum.
At the very least this debate/discussion is promoting awareness of something that has no doubt been around since the Wright bros.
CW
It would be a fair chance that pilots over the years have stepped into the 'office' with some alcohol/drugs still in their system known or unknown. Like aircraft with contaminated fuel/oil it does happen at times & will continue happening as long as there are humans involved. Just how we handle these future events by way of random testing etc is the area in question & also how to educate so that the risk is kept to an absolute minimum.
At the very least this debate/discussion is promoting awareness of something that has no doubt been around since the Wright bros.
CW
Man Bilong Balus long PNG
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Looking forward to returning to Japan soon but in the meantime continuing the never ending search for a bad bottle of Red!
Age: 69
Posts: 2,980
Received 108 Likes
on
61 Posts
I am really not sure, but I seem to remember someone making the statement a few months back that at the present time you cannot be compelled to submit to these tests!
Do not take the above as Gospel!! I suspect that AFAP has looked into this issue and I hope that someone from the Federation can post some definite information on this subject ASAP.
Do not take the above as Gospel!! I suspect that AFAP has looked into this issue and I hope that someone from the Federation can post some definite information on this subject ASAP.
Flying Spike, thank-you for your erudite posts.
Will the drug tester on the apron listen to your comments that I took over the counter drug X two days ago and declared that to my boss who was happy for me to keep flying as was my DAME?
So one could get a positive oral fluid test on the apron walking to your aircraft and still go flying? 
And does not AS4308-1995 deal with drug testing in urine; my understanding is that the ramp testing will be oral fluid? AS4760 is linked here, but you gotta buy it. Is nothing free from the govt these days?
http://www.saiglobal.com/PDFTemp/Pre.../4760-2006.pdf
If you are taking over-the counter medication , declare it to your employer.
As a rule there is no penalty attached to an initial positive test. That only kicks in after a positive test is confirmed.
And does not AS4308-1995 deal with drug testing in urine; my understanding is that the ramp testing will be oral fluid? AS4760 is linked here, but you gotta buy it. Is nothing free from the govt these days?
http://www.saiglobal.com/PDFTemp/Pre.../4760-2006.pdf
Last edited by compressor stall; 18th May 2008 at 13:08.
Also coming to your local ATC center.
For a number of years ATC have been subject to testing "if the supervisor suspected the controller was affected".
Prior to that, I believe testing was only an option after a serious incident where the supervisor suspected the controller was affected.
Controllers were given access to independently supplied[anonymous] drug test kits for all tested drug groups and advice as to the times/amounts that should be detectable.
eg. while THC can be detected for weeks the tests applied would only show positive if consumed in the previous 3-5days[similar to roadside tests I believe].
Most who took up this option had amusing evenings with their teenage children.
I have yet to see how the CASA tests compare to these and can only suggest to all aviation professionals that if we need an over the counter medication then we log it with our employers before signing on and if necessary advise that we are available for operational duty at THEIR dicretion.
AA
For a number of years ATC have been subject to testing "if the supervisor suspected the controller was affected".
Prior to that, I believe testing was only an option after a serious incident where the supervisor suspected the controller was affected.
Controllers were given access to independently supplied[anonymous] drug test kits for all tested drug groups and advice as to the times/amounts that should be detectable.
eg. while THC can be detected for weeks the tests applied would only show positive if consumed in the previous 3-5days[similar to roadside tests I believe].
Most who took up this option had amusing evenings with their teenage children.
I have yet to see how the CASA tests compare to these and can only suggest to all aviation professionals that if we need an over the counter medication then we log it with our employers before signing on and if necessary advise that we are available for operational duty at THEIR dicretion.
AA
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 55
Posts: 6,864
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Also coming to your local ATC center.
I would be surprised if there were any, but lets not assume there are not!
J
the tests applied would only show positive if consumed in the previous 3-5 days [similar to roadside tests I believe]
http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2008/s2201298.htm
"Police admit error in roadside drug test..a driver..was wrongly identified as the first in the world to return a positive roadside drug test."
A 'statement of regret' (not apology) from Vicpol and a sizable financial settlement of an undisclosed amount.
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Middle East
Posts: 129
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can they issue us with hand held units to test ourselves first! 
What if you had plenty of time before sign on, say 9 hrs with responsible drinking the night before and you still registered over zero? An airline I used to work for had testing, and this happened, I was with the Capt. on the over night, he had no more than 6- 1.3 standard drinks.
I guess if your over the limit, your over the limit.
I think there will be plenty of pilots over zero on the alcohol readings in Oz, especially the airlines that have overnights.
On a more serious note, do we know what Airlines will be targeted? is it just the Australian carriers?
I still think it is a little sad we have to test pilots now, imagine doing this 40 years ago! that would have been interesting.
Also is there any reason to test us? has there been any incidents that should give good reason to test pilots?
Yes, yes I know we should all be reading zero, but random testing, still think that a bit to much.
What if you had plenty of time before sign on, say 9 hrs with responsible drinking the night before and you still registered over zero? An airline I used to work for had testing, and this happened, I was with the Capt. on the over night, he had no more than 6- 1.3 standard drinks.
I guess if your over the limit, your over the limit.
I think there will be plenty of pilots over zero on the alcohol readings in Oz, especially the airlines that have overnights.
On a more serious note, do we know what Airlines will be targeted? is it just the Australian carriers?
I still think it is a little sad we have to test pilots now, imagine doing this 40 years ago!
that would have been interesting.Also is there any reason to test us? has there been any incidents that should give good reason to test pilots?
Yes, yes I know we should all be reading zero, but random testing, still think that a bit to much.
Last edited by Wings Of Fury; 18th May 2008 at 15:30.
If Sudafed returns a false positive because of pseudoephidrine, then there is going to be lots and lots of trouble if the testing can't distinguish between it and other drugs.
Occasional SCUBA divers like me always keep it handy because a head cold or sinus irritation can ruin a $5000 diving holiday without it. I'm sure that there would be a lot of pilots who would keep it handy as well for approximately similar reasons.
Occasional SCUBA divers like me always keep it handy because a head cold or sinus irritation can ruin a $5000 diving holiday without it. I'm sure that there would be a lot of pilots who would keep it handy as well for approximately similar reasons.