There is much disagreement over the legality of drug testing program in the place of work, above all the legality of arbitrary drug testing services. Many legal experts regard it to be a personal privacy assault and an irrational search and abduction, opposing to the rights granted to the citizens by the amendments passed by constitution.
Pushing employees to take up drug tests at work is a debatable issue, convoluted by human rights legislation, conflicting court verdicts and American economic pressure, say commerce council and civil liberties connoisseurs.
The federal government’s Human Rights Commission forbids prejudice on grounds of a disability, which includes drug or alcohol obsession. It used to visibly combat pre-employment and random drug tests. But it is reviewing those procedures after recent court rulings. The commission has not released new guidelines up until now.
The state laws governing the drug testing procedures run the gamut. Some of these laws allow random testing, on the other hand some take measures to forbid them. If there is suspicion of drug abuse the relaxations in these regulations are cited to carry out the drug testing. But in majority of the public administration departments or the workplaces, a particular section of people or workers always remain the targets in a company that drug test.
Laws facilitating the practice of professional drug testing should pass the constitutional muster. But for a private organization the legality of the drug testing is largely based on the existence of state law or a stated public policy regarding privacy or on the ability of a claimant to assert a tort invasion of privacy. Constitutional challenges to random drug testing employee have been dealt successfully in various states of United States of America. Many legal authorities have still not found any public policy that limits the usage of drug testing to discharge the employees based on the results.
