How useful is random drug/alcohol testing?
Thread Starter
How useful is random drug/alcohol testing?
Hi everyone,
I'm doing a Human Factors paper (yeah, the subject everyone loves to hate) for a degree, and my next assignment is on the right of aviation businesses to randomly test for drug and alcohol substances on workers involved in safety sensitive roles.
Personally I think the main reason airlines are doing it is to keep pax happy, by having them think everyone is 'clean'. I don't think drug and alcohol abuse is that rife in the aviation community (on a whole), although the level of abuse may change in different aviation environments (Helo, Training, Commercial, ATO, ATC, Maintenance).
I do have an aviaiton background (LAME, Glidier pilot, PPL student with share in Piper Super Cub), so plain language is not required
Anybody have an opinion about this??
Thanks for the help.
NOOOBY
I'm doing a Human Factors paper (yeah, the subject everyone loves to hate) for a degree, and my next assignment is on the right of aviation businesses to randomly test for drug and alcohol substances on workers involved in safety sensitive roles.
Personally I think the main reason airlines are doing it is to keep pax happy, by having them think everyone is 'clean'. I don't think drug and alcohol abuse is that rife in the aviation community (on a whole), although the level of abuse may change in different aviation environments (Helo, Training, Commercial, ATO, ATC, Maintenance).
I do have an aviaiton background (LAME, Glidier pilot, PPL student with share in Piper Super Cub), so plain language is not required
Anybody have an opinion about this??
Thanks for the help.
NOOOBY
Last edited by noooby; 29th Sep 2004 at 03:56.
Guest
Posts: n/a
You may want to chat to an organization which implements RDT, most notably the Armed Forces.... I believe the incidence of persons caught is close to zero, considering that the tests cover not only aircrew, and so few members are obviously abusing drugs, I personally would say yes, its a good idea. (for drugs anyway!)
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Who can say?
Posts: 1,700
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[personal opinion mode=on]
Any pilot who resorts to drink to make him sleep due to a heavy roster is several times over an idiot.
Reasons?
Any pilot who resorts to drink to make him sleep due to a heavy roster is several times over an idiot.
Reasons?
- Alcohol does not make you sleep. It is not a soporific, but a stimulant. Any sleep you get from alcohol is the wrong type of sleep - read any book on Human Factors
- Endangering your career by drinking when due on duty is just plain stupid.
- Endangering your aircraft, passengers and crew by operating when under the influence of alcohol is criminal stupidity.
- If your roster does not allow you to get enough or adequate rest and there is a danger you will be fatigued, there is a simple get-out clause in any UK-based operator's FTL scheme. If notice is not taken, then you can file a CHIRP report, talk to your FOI, talk to your FSO, talk to your BALPA rep, or just call in sick.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Germany
Age: 76
Posts: 1,561
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Alcohol is a sedative, not a stimulant. The reason we can get rowdy is that it can sedate the parts of the brain that moderate our behaviour.
The quality of sleep when 'under the influence' is rather poor, yes. The parts of the brain that need to be exercised during sleep are sedated. You may often notice how, although you seem to have had a deep and dreamless sleep, you 'wake up tired,' if not hung-over.
After a while you can become alcohol-dependent, so that you need it to function. Trying to sleep when not 'under the influence' can be very difficult until you are finally free of dependence.
An insidious thing about alcohol-dependence is the way that it clouds judgement, so that recognition of this degradation in function produced by alcohol is absent. Too, if most of your friends are also alcohol-dependent, this can seem to be a normal state.
Every time this subject comes up here, just look at all the moaning about alcohol testing and the injustice of it all, serious thought given to just how much drink can be taken up to what point before flying, what sort of testing device one might use, etc., etc.
People in aviation realise that being caught with rather small blood-alcohol concentrations can be career death and yet they persist in drinking. What does that tell us?
The quality of sleep when 'under the influence' is rather poor, yes. The parts of the brain that need to be exercised during sleep are sedated. You may often notice how, although you seem to have had a deep and dreamless sleep, you 'wake up tired,' if not hung-over.
After a while you can become alcohol-dependent, so that you need it to function. Trying to sleep when not 'under the influence' can be very difficult until you are finally free of dependence.
An insidious thing about alcohol-dependence is the way that it clouds judgement, so that recognition of this degradation in function produced by alcohol is absent. Too, if most of your friends are also alcohol-dependent, this can seem to be a normal state.
Every time this subject comes up here, just look at all the moaning about alcohol testing and the injustice of it all, serious thought given to just how much drink can be taken up to what point before flying, what sort of testing device one might use, etc., etc.
People in aviation realise that being caught with rather small blood-alcohol concentrations can be career death and yet they persist in drinking. What does that tell us?
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: London
Posts: 156
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Accidents in the workplace caused by drink & Hangovers costs Industries Millions if not billions every year (I have read a fair bit on this) most companies have t&c which state employees should not be under the influence of alcohol whilst on works time and for years this has gone untested.
I believe it will only be a matter of time before many industries will start to enforce their t&c to save them money & to make pax/customers feel safer and that work forces are being tested, it's also a deterrent (prevention the best cure and all that)
I do however have a biased opinion on this as I sell Medically Approved Breathalysers. Nearly every week we sell several units to individuals who for whatever reason want to be able to test themselves. In the last 2 weeks we have received orders from Engineering companies, one in the telecoms sector and one in a.n. other sector.
Chuks I was also having a conversation with a HP instructor the other day who told me a story of a family who had a dinner party and let a guest leave in their vehicle under the influence of Alcohol. Apparently the driver hit someone on the way home and believe it or not the position of responsibility fell back to the people hosting the dinner party for letting him leave in his vehicle knowing how much he had had to drink !! Now imagine that was a company van for example who would be at fault, the driver or the company for not ensuring it;s driver was not over the limit before signing out the van ?
It's a mad mad world out there !!
FS
I believe it will only be a matter of time before many industries will start to enforce their t&c to save them money & to make pax/customers feel safer and that work forces are being tested, it's also a deterrent (prevention the best cure and all that)
I do however have a biased opinion on this as I sell Medically Approved Breathalysers. Nearly every week we sell several units to individuals who for whatever reason want to be able to test themselves. In the last 2 weeks we have received orders from Engineering companies, one in the telecoms sector and one in a.n. other sector.
Chuks I was also having a conversation with a HP instructor the other day who told me a story of a family who had a dinner party and let a guest leave in their vehicle under the influence of Alcohol. Apparently the driver hit someone on the way home and believe it or not the position of responsibility fell back to the people hosting the dinner party for letting him leave in his vehicle knowing how much he had had to drink !! Now imagine that was a company van for example who would be at fault, the driver or the company for not ensuring it;s driver was not over the limit before signing out the van ?
It's a mad mad world out there !!
FS
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Germany
Age: 76
Posts: 1,561
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the States the so-called 'Happy Hour' (drinks half-price) went long ago due to this being taken to encourage people getting drunk and then driving.
It's sort of interesting to watch typical herd behaviour. That's to say, every so often someone gets nabbed for cruising and boozing, when it's usually career death. Then the rest of the herd raise their heads to watch the vultures descend in a cloud on poor old Joe Bloggs before lowering them again to their drinks. Well, most of us have been boozing far longer than there has been this relatively new emphasis on sobriety.
I take it as an individual decision. I once wasted at least a half-hour talking to a friend who supposedly wanted to quit boozing and straighten his life out... just not right now! Of course we had to have a drink while we were waiting for this new leaf to be turned over. Never got around to that, as far as I know.
I could imagine someone first being irresponsible enough to drive drunk and then being persuaded by their advocate that this really wasn't their fault. Here in Germany most people are very good about ordering a taxi. And in Nigeria the police can often be persuaded to be very lenient!
It's sort of interesting to watch typical herd behaviour. That's to say, every so often someone gets nabbed for cruising and boozing, when it's usually career death. Then the rest of the herd raise their heads to watch the vultures descend in a cloud on poor old Joe Bloggs before lowering them again to their drinks. Well, most of us have been boozing far longer than there has been this relatively new emphasis on sobriety.
I take it as an individual decision. I once wasted at least a half-hour talking to a friend who supposedly wanted to quit boozing and straighten his life out... just not right now! Of course we had to have a drink while we were waiting for this new leaf to be turned over. Never got around to that, as far as I know.
I could imagine someone first being irresponsible enough to drive drunk and then being persuaded by their advocate that this really wasn't their fault. Here in Germany most people are very good about ordering a taxi. And in Nigeria the police can often be persuaded to be very lenient!
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,843
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To address the original question - "How useful is random drug/alcohol testing?", in my opinion very very useful. If the random drug/alcohol testers come up with a zero zero arrest record, then the system has worked, 'would be' abusers have been frightened off by the threat of exposure. My only concern is that if the zero zero arrest record continues, the powers that be may see this as indicative that pilots don't abuse drugs/alcohol and abandon the programme, allowing the abusers out of the closet again.
We are all aware that in the past, there was sufficient alcohol abuse amongst pilots to be genuinely concerned. These abusers were very visible to colleagues, and members of the public, but drug abusers adopt a very low profile indeed. The anonymity of these Pprune forums has enabled several 'would if they could' drug abusers to say their piece, enlightening us to the fact that our profession is infected with real or potential drug abusers. And what is their greatest fear, or primary reason for abstaining - Being Caught!
Random drug/alcohol testing is not just useful, it is ESSENTIAL!
Regards,
Old Smokey
We are all aware that in the past, there was sufficient alcohol abuse amongst pilots to be genuinely concerned. These abusers were very visible to colleagues, and members of the public, but drug abusers adopt a very low profile indeed. The anonymity of these Pprune forums has enabled several 'would if they could' drug abusers to say their piece, enlightening us to the fact that our profession is infected with real or potential drug abusers. And what is their greatest fear, or primary reason for abstaining - Being Caught!
Random drug/alcohol testing is not just useful, it is ESSENTIAL!
Regards,
Old Smokey
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Germany
Age: 76
Posts: 1,561
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There are two questions there....
The header asks 'how useful is it to' but in the body of the text is the question 'does the employer have the right to' randomly test for alcohol.
I suppose the employer has the right to do whatever it wants as a condition of employment. Lots of contracts now require random drug-testing, and not just for alcohol. For instance I am required to show a positive for malaria prophylaxis; it's not just negative drug-testing nowadays. As long as it's understood in advance what the requirements are it is pretty clear that, yes, the employer has the right to randomly test for drugs, alcohol among them.
I suppose one could refuse a test but that would be grounds for immediate dismissal without much chance of an appeal. When you sign the contract you agree to the conditions of employment, one being subjected to random drug-testing.
I had a good look at the USA Department of Transportation (the parent agency of the Federal Aviation Administration) form for a drug test, a full A4 sheet with various sections that nailed shut every loophole. I don't think even Johnny Cochrane could get you out of either failing or refusing a test. You could kiss your job and your ticket good-bye.
After that it's a long and wearisome process to get the ticket back. Basically you have to turn your life around and then get that certified to the FAA's satisfaction before they will let you work again as a pilot. Plan on a long time selling garage door-openers!
When you ask the question 'how useful' then you must get into cost/benefit questions, the same sort of logic used for many other safety-related questions. I think there the jury is still out.
In other words, would the money spent on random drug-testing save more lives if it were spent on other things? Looked at that way I think it may well be that this money is being spent more to assure the general public that we are 'clean'. The number of (necessarily high-profile) pilots caught with too much alcohol in their systems is statistically extremely low. Alcohol or drugs as an accident factor is also quite low, as far as I know.
So, while I basically agree with Old Smokey that random drug-testing is a Good Thing I have to say that I am unsure of its absolute usefulness.
It's another question entirely but I would suggest attacking alcohol abuse at its roots. A lot of us started young in the military, where binge drinking was the norm, and carried that with us into civil aviation. Perhaps that has now changed, but I have found it very rare to meet an ex-military aviator or engineer who was not also a formidable toper, and proud of that.
When we try to control heavy drinking now with random testing, that ignores the question of where the problem comes from in the first place, doesn't it? It might be worth someone studying the idea of trying to re-wire young people's values in the beginning rather than later trying to control a problem that has been allowed to come into existence.
I suppose the employer has the right to do whatever it wants as a condition of employment. Lots of contracts now require random drug-testing, and not just for alcohol. For instance I am required to show a positive for malaria prophylaxis; it's not just negative drug-testing nowadays. As long as it's understood in advance what the requirements are it is pretty clear that, yes, the employer has the right to randomly test for drugs, alcohol among them.
I suppose one could refuse a test but that would be grounds for immediate dismissal without much chance of an appeal. When you sign the contract you agree to the conditions of employment, one being subjected to random drug-testing.
I had a good look at the USA Department of Transportation (the parent agency of the Federal Aviation Administration) form for a drug test, a full A4 sheet with various sections that nailed shut every loophole. I don't think even Johnny Cochrane could get you out of either failing or refusing a test. You could kiss your job and your ticket good-bye.
After that it's a long and wearisome process to get the ticket back. Basically you have to turn your life around and then get that certified to the FAA's satisfaction before they will let you work again as a pilot. Plan on a long time selling garage door-openers!
When you ask the question 'how useful' then you must get into cost/benefit questions, the same sort of logic used for many other safety-related questions. I think there the jury is still out.
In other words, would the money spent on random drug-testing save more lives if it were spent on other things? Looked at that way I think it may well be that this money is being spent more to assure the general public that we are 'clean'. The number of (necessarily high-profile) pilots caught with too much alcohol in their systems is statistically extremely low. Alcohol or drugs as an accident factor is also quite low, as far as I know.
So, while I basically agree with Old Smokey that random drug-testing is a Good Thing I have to say that I am unsure of its absolute usefulness.
It's another question entirely but I would suggest attacking alcohol abuse at its roots. A lot of us started young in the military, where binge drinking was the norm, and carried that with us into civil aviation. Perhaps that has now changed, but I have found it very rare to meet an ex-military aviator or engineer who was not also a formidable toper, and proud of that.
When we try to control heavy drinking now with random testing, that ignores the question of where the problem comes from in the first place, doesn't it? It might be worth someone studying the idea of trying to re-wire young people's values in the beginning rather than later trying to control a problem that has been allowed to come into existence.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: GLASGOW
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I used to work on the Railway as a Safety Inspector and I knew of people taking drugs - say 3 days before a shift, so I arranged a RDT and nothing showed! Albeit they weren't high when they were working, but they were taking illegal drugs.
RDT is useful to catch people who are taking drugs on the job, which inturn should increase safety.
RDT is useful to catch people who are taking drugs on the job, which inturn should increase safety.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Was against it from the start and the statistics have proven this is a very cost-ineffective safety program. In fact, so few airline workers (not just pilots) were found to test positive, that alcohol was added just to save some face. Of course the way it is conducted means it is ineffective as well.
Random drug testing should be at the discretion of the employer. Not another costly government mandate.
Airline pilots had a proven program of interdicting crewmembers with problems and getting them straightened out. There is no "drug problem" to worry about in the industry.
Random drug testing should be at the discretion of the employer. Not another costly government mandate.
Airline pilots had a proven program of interdicting crewmembers with problems and getting them straightened out. There is no "drug problem" to worry about in the industry.
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: EGYD
Posts: 1,073
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I believe the incidence of persons caught is close to zero
RAF CDT Results
I'matightbastard
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,747
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I turned up to fly on evening and they said "Onan, you've been selected for randon drug testing. Here's the paperwork and the clinic is out on 183."
"Oh ok" says I ever trying to be helpful "What do I do then, call them up and book an appointment?"
"If you did that" came the icy reply "it would hardly be randon now would it?"
Doh!
"Oh ok" says I ever trying to be helpful "What do I do then, call them up and book an appointment?"
"If you did that" came the icy reply "it would hardly be randon now would it?"
Doh!
