Reasonable cause testing for package car drivers
- Thread starter JustAnumber1
- Start date
JustAnumber1
Well-Known Member
Wow, I'm a drug user, im a threat to society and a bad person with poor character. Yet, these stone throwers that are such great people, safe drivers, are incapable of reading comprehension. I'm not asking how to keep my job, I have moved on, I'm asking whether or not I have to see a sap. Why is that so hard to get a relevant answer on? I don't care what your point of view on drug use or me as a person is. Completely irrelevant to my question.
I was in the same circumstance about 23 years ago and I resigned as well. To my knowledge nothing was passed onto the DOT and it never came up in any subsequent job interview. Is sap "substance abuse professional"? If so, I don't think you have to but it really couldn't hurt. Think long and hard about your career path.
JustAnumber1
Well-Known Member
Thank you so much bbsam, that's the information I was asking about. Yes, sap = substance abuse professional, my career path most likely involves getting an advanced degree and i doubt I will ever be involved with a dot regulated job again, I just wanted to have a clean slate in the event that I am. Again, you have offered the only answer relevant to my question and I appreciate it.
F
FrigidAdCorrector
Guest
By the contract yes. Legally drivers can be tested for Pre-employment, Reasonable Cause/Suspicion, Random, Return-to-duty, and Post Accident.
They didn't violate any DOT language. If they really did as you say they did, they did violate the contract. But you should have fought it.
No the contract says that. The DOT regulations say no such thing. And before you say they do I recommend you post a link to it in the Part 40.
hondo
promoted to mediocrity
@JustAnumber1, I think you should contact the labor mgr to find out if this was actually reported to DOT/FMCSA. The only other thing I can think of is to try to have an 'anonymous/off the record' chat with someone at your state's DMV.
Something else to consider, the testing facility & lab now have you on record as a positive test, but I haven't seen anything that they report to gov't agencies directly.
As far as the SAP, I don't know about the law. The contract calls for it to be provided to you, but only if you ask for help before a test. You posts seem to show you are mixing up the law and the contract.
I do think you are doing the right thing by trying to tie up these loose ends, so to speak.
Something else to consider, the testing facility & lab now have you on record as a positive test, but I haven't seen anything that they report to gov't agencies directly.
As far as the SAP, I don't know about the law. The contract calls for it to be provided to you, but only if you ask for help before a test. You posts seem to show you are mixing up the law and the contract.
I do think you are doing the right thing by trying to tie up these loose ends, so to speak.
Your question wasnt "lost" on the crowd, your question simply lacks MERIT. Your question lacks sincerity and this can be established by your own words
ie: "because I'd like to go ahead and sit through whatever class, do whatever drugs are bad bs I need to and have it out of the way"
This statement demonstrates through your own words that you lack "INTEGRITY" and have no desire to rid yourself of the desease that is DRUG USE. At this point, giving you ANY kind of advice is foolish at best.
We are all responsible for our own actions in life. YOU need to be held accountable for your actions by figuring all this kind of stuff out for yourself. Maybe, just maybe when you move on with your life and you walk in to motor vehicles and apply for a CDL someone brings you back to reality and tells you are disqualified because of your drug use, then maybe you will learn a lesson you otherwise arent willing to learn today.
Asking people to "help" you circumvent the reality that drug use isnt a good thing for you is really a stupid proposition in the larger scale of things. You came to work for a fortune 500 company, you also state that you had two other jobs, but they are not fortune 500 companies and simply smaller private businesses. There is a ginormous difference between the two.
While the two private businesses may or may not be cool with you getting high all day long, NO FORTUNE 500 company wants a person like this on the payroll.
This is the difference between a bright future and a future brightened by a lighter taking your next hit in the alley that you will be residing in once you lose all your jobs.
Your "CHARACTER" is very important in this situation. You have already "ADMITTED" to almost being fired several times so we can also interpret from this that you were not in "good standing" with the company.
Whatever your reasons, its clear you didnt belong with UPS and amongst our brotherhood of employees who come to work in a state of mind clear of drug involvement.
Whatever your "WEAKNESSES" are, drugs will not fix them, only mask that weakness until you render yourself useless. Success stories of people who use drugs are limited, a small percentage escape the grip of drugs and go on to productive lives. The others, who reject the concept that drugs are bad, simply continue with the use until they spin their lives straight into the toilet.
I realize that you want information about what is going to happen, but you really need to find that out first hand for yourself and stop looking for an out.
Nobody should "ease" your mind by telling you anything other than the truth. You want "peace of mind?" stop doing drugs.
TOS.
JustAnumber1
Well-Known Member
Wow, you really enjoy your soap box huh??? I'm looking for an out? An out from what? Im asking whether or not I have to see a sap? I think you need to check the definitions of some of your big words. I'm not trying to circumvent anything, I'm asking if im required to do anything, trying to figure out a way around a requirement would constitute circumvention. I lack integrity? What have I lied about or stolen from anyone? Your brotherhood consists of thousands of individuals and it is evidenced on brown cafe by other's responses as well as common sense that some members of your brotherhood actually use drugs too. Sorry to be the one to inform you of this but I assure you that someone you work with everyday and probably respect, couldn't pass a drug test. You tell me I need to figure this out on my own, why do you think I'm here asking this question? Isn't brown cafe a resource to be used for figuring stuff out? You obviously are out of touch with reality of you think there is no one else at ups that would fail a drug test if they gave everyone a random test, I'm pretty sure that's why they don't, because it would cripple their operation.
JustAnumber1
Well-Known Member
Following your logic, Washington and Colorado will eventually secede from the union right? Their gdp should be plummeting and soon enough there will be no houses, only back ally stoners right? Millions of people smoke weed, millions of weed smokers still go to work, pay their bills, raise healthy children. Please tell how this is possible. I mean, shouldn't all their lives be in the toilet by now?
Your not required to take a class or anything else you never had a CDL and your regular driver was never suspended. IF the DOT was notified and you had to do something your would have been notified by them.
Just a little FYI if you get a CDL and a job that requires you to have a CDL you can be drug test at anytime for any reason. Also most companies have random unannounced drug test and the DOT could show up and do there own unannounced Drug test.
As a UPS package car driver the only way for you to get drug tested was to:
1. Give them a reason to test you (you behavior)
2. All ready failed #1 and part of your treated program and agreement to keep working at UPS is to agree to unannounced drug test at anytime.
As a UPS Feeder Driver you can be test at anytime as stated above.
JustAnumber1
Well-Known Member
Fmcsa 302.307
§ 382.307: Reasonable suspicion testing.
(a) An employer shall require a driver to submit to an alcohol test when the employer has reasonable suspicion to believe that the driver has violated the prohibitions of subpart B of this part concerning alcohol. The employer's determination that reasonable suspicion exists to require the driver to undergo an alcohol test must be based on specific, contemporaneous, articulable observations concerning the appearance, behavior, speech or body odors of the driver.
(b) An employer shall require a driver to submit to a controlled substances test when the employer has reasonable suspicion to believe that the driver has violated the prohibitions of subpart B of this part concerning controlled substances. The employer's determination that reasonable suspicion exists to require the driver to undergo a controlled substances test must be based on specific, contemporaneous, articulable observations concerning the appearance, behavior, speech or body odors of the driver. The observations may include indications of the chronic and withdrawal effects of controlled substances.
(c) The required observations for alcohol and/or controlled substances reasonable suspicion testing shall be made by a supervisor or company official who is trained in accordance with § 382.603. The person who makes the determination that reasonable suspicion exists to conduct an alcohol test shall not conduct the alcohol test of the driver.
(d) Alcohol testing is authorized by this section only if the observations required by paragraph (a) of this section are made during, just preceding, or just after the period of the work day that the driver is required to be in compliance with this part. A driver may be directed by the employer to only undergo reasonable suspicion testing while the driver is performing safety-sensitive functions, just before the driver is to perform safety-sensitive functions, or just after the driver has ceased performing such functions.
(e)(1) If an alcohol test required by this section is not administered within two hours following the determination under paragraph (a) of this section, the employer shall prepare and maintain on file a record stating the reasons the alcohol test was not promptly administered. If an alcohol test required by this section is not administered within eight hours following the determination under paragraph (a) of this section, the employer shall cease attempts to administer an alcohol test and shall state in the record the reasons for not administering the test.
(2) Notwithstanding the absence of a reasonable suspicion alcohol test under this section, no driver shall report for duty or remain on duty requiring the performance of safety-sensitive functions while the driver is under the influence of or impaired by alcohol, as shown by the behavioral, speech, and performance indicators of alcohol misuse, nor shall an employer permit the driver to perform or continue to perform safety-sensitive functions, until:
(i) An alcohol test is administered and the driver's alcohol concentration measures less than 0.02; or
(ii) Twenty four hours have elapsed following the determination under paragraph (a) of this section that there is reasonable suspicion to believe that the driver has violated the prohibitions in this part concerning the use of alcohol.
(3) Except as provided in paragraph (e)(2) of this section, no employer shall take any action under this part against a driver based solely on the driver's behavior and appearance, with respect to alcohol use, in the absence of an alcohol test. This does not prohibit an employer with independent authority of this part from taking any action otherwise consistent with law.
(friend) A written record shall be made of the observations leading to an alcohol or controlled substances reasonable suspicion test, and signed by the supervisor or company official who made the observations, within 24 hours of the observed behavior or before the results of the alcohol or controlled substances tests are released, whichever is earlier.
§ 382.307: Reasonable suspicion testing.
(a) An employer shall require a driver to submit to an alcohol test when the employer has reasonable suspicion to believe that the driver has violated the prohibitions of subpart B of this part concerning alcohol. The employer's determination that reasonable suspicion exists to require the driver to undergo an alcohol test must be based on specific, contemporaneous, articulable observations concerning the appearance, behavior, speech or body odors of the driver.
(b) An employer shall require a driver to submit to a controlled substances test when the employer has reasonable suspicion to believe that the driver has violated the prohibitions of subpart B of this part concerning controlled substances. The employer's determination that reasonable suspicion exists to require the driver to undergo a controlled substances test must be based on specific, contemporaneous, articulable observations concerning the appearance, behavior, speech or body odors of the driver. The observations may include indications of the chronic and withdrawal effects of controlled substances.
(c) The required observations for alcohol and/or controlled substances reasonable suspicion testing shall be made by a supervisor or company official who is trained in accordance with § 382.603. The person who makes the determination that reasonable suspicion exists to conduct an alcohol test shall not conduct the alcohol test of the driver.
(d) Alcohol testing is authorized by this section only if the observations required by paragraph (a) of this section are made during, just preceding, or just after the period of the work day that the driver is required to be in compliance with this part. A driver may be directed by the employer to only undergo reasonable suspicion testing while the driver is performing safety-sensitive functions, just before the driver is to perform safety-sensitive functions, or just after the driver has ceased performing such functions.
(e)(1) If an alcohol test required by this section is not administered within two hours following the determination under paragraph (a) of this section, the employer shall prepare and maintain on file a record stating the reasons the alcohol test was not promptly administered. If an alcohol test required by this section is not administered within eight hours following the determination under paragraph (a) of this section, the employer shall cease attempts to administer an alcohol test and shall state in the record the reasons for not administering the test.
(2) Notwithstanding the absence of a reasonable suspicion alcohol test under this section, no driver shall report for duty or remain on duty requiring the performance of safety-sensitive functions while the driver is under the influence of or impaired by alcohol, as shown by the behavioral, speech, and performance indicators of alcohol misuse, nor shall an employer permit the driver to perform or continue to perform safety-sensitive functions, until:
(i) An alcohol test is administered and the driver's alcohol concentration measures less than 0.02; or
(ii) Twenty four hours have elapsed following the determination under paragraph (a) of this section that there is reasonable suspicion to believe that the driver has violated the prohibitions in this part concerning the use of alcohol.
(3) Except as provided in paragraph (e)(2) of this section, no employer shall take any action under this part against a driver based solely on the driver's behavior and appearance, with respect to alcohol use, in the absence of an alcohol test. This does not prohibit an employer with independent authority of this part from taking any action otherwise consistent with law.
(friend) A written record shall be made of the observations leading to an alcohol or controlled substances reasonable suspicion test, and signed by the supervisor or company official who made the observations, within 24 hours of the observed behavior or before the results of the alcohol or controlled substances tests are released, whichever is earlier.
JustAnumber1
Well-Known Member
So, I was never observed by a supervisor, there was no written record made, what part of this am I misinterpreting?
JustAnumber1
Well-Known Member
Thanks you upsguy72, that is what I've been trying to find out. I understand fully that cdl drivers are subject to random tests. I no longer work for ups so I don have to worry about any future tests. I'm simply wondering if I am required to see a sap, it doesn't appear that I am, as I have not received anything from dot.
You got caught, for what ever reason.
You failed the test, proper or not.
You resigned!
Give it a break and and move on!!
hellfire
no one considers UPS people."real" Teamsters.-BUG
HAR HAR HAR,..good one I hope your not that naive
