|
Originally Posted by Fredog
Originally Posted by kc0iv
Originally Posted by Fredog
Originally Posted by golfhobo
my boss called and said I was up for a random, but we werent going to miss a load over it, he said next time I got in early, to go and do it. If you were wanting a raise, you might want to point this out to him, with a bit of Tony Soprano "squeeze" to go along with it! :lol: (k)(1) Each employer shall ensure that random alcohol and controlled substances tests conducted under this part are unannounced. (l) Each employer shall require that each driver who is notified of selection for random alcohol and/or controlled substances testing proceeds to the test site immediately; provided, however, that if the driver is performing a safety-sensitive function, other than driving a commercial motor vehicle, at the time of notification, the employer shall instead ensure that the driver ceases to perform the safety- sensitive function and proceeds to the testing site as soon as possible. Simply put The employer can not advise the employee in advance that a random is due until the employee is sent for testing. It makes no difference if he knows you can pass the test. Think about it for a moment. If you know in advance then it can't be a random unannounced test. As golfhobo said -- Your boss broke the law. Your boss should have waited until such time as you were free and not miss that load you spoke of. It not uncommon for companies to wait before the employee is told about the random. Most companies receive the notice well in advance so they can arrange for the employees to be free. As a side note. There are companies that select certain employees (knowing they will pass the test) while knowing other employees would fail. Your example and the one I just gave is why I think all employees should be tested and the notice should be given by an independent source. kc0iv |
Originally Posted by kc0iv
Originally Posted by Fredog
Originally Posted by kc0iv
Originally Posted by Fredog
Originally Posted by golfhobo
my boss called and said I was up for a random, but we werent going to miss a load over it, he said next time I got in early, to go and do it. If you were wanting a raise, you might want to point this out to him, with a bit of Tony Soprano "squeeze" to go along with it! :lol: (k)(1) Each employer shall ensure that random alcohol and controlled substances tests conducted under this part are unannounced. (l) Each employer shall require that each driver who is notified of selection for random alcohol and/or controlled substances testing proceeds to the test site immediately; provided, however, that if the driver is performing a safety-sensitive function, other than driving a commercial motor vehicle, at the time of notification, the employer shall instead ensure that the driver ceases to perform the safety- sensitive function and proceeds to the testing site as soon as possible. Simply put The employer can not advise the employee in advance that a random is due until the employee is sent for testing. It makes no difference if he knows you can pass the test. Think about it for a moment. If you know in advance then it can't be a random unannounced test. As golfhobo said -- Your boss broke the law. Your boss should have waited until such time as you were free and not miss that load you spoke of. It not uncommon for companies to wait before the employee is told about the random. Most companies receive the notice well in advance so they can arrange for the employees to be free. As a side note. There are companies that select certain employees (knowing they will pass the test) while knowing other employees would fail. Your example and the one I just gave is why I think all employees should be tested and the notice should be given by an independent source. kc0iv by the way, if my boss had any doubts about a driver being able to pass, he would get him in right away without any warning. we dont play that game,in 50 years in business, the company has never had a fatal accident and has never been sued. I think that says something. so lets leave it at this. he should have done it the way you are suppossed to, he didnt break the law but he did violate regulations. he didnt do it to get away with anything, he simply thinks that a random test for someone who he knows is clean is not worth missing a load for. |
Originally Posted by Fredog
it still doesnt say its illegal for him to tell me nor does it mention any penalties for doing so. by the way, if my boss had any doubts about a driver being able to pass, he would get him in right away without any warning. we dont play that game,in 50 years in business, the company has never had a fatal accident and has never been sued. I think that says something. so lets leave it at this. he should have done it the way you are suppossed to, he didnt break the law but he did violate regulations. he didnt do it to get away with anything, he simply thinks that a random test for someone who he knows is clean is not worth missing a load for. Those same rules and regulations don't say anything about penalties for violating the hours-of-service either but I can assure you any rule violation can be prosecuted. I do agree let's leave it to however you want to believe. I can see you have made up your mind and you are not going to accept the facts as they are written. Have a great day. kc0iv |
Too bad they just can put microchips under our skin. You can't fool the tests and 2 days does not make any difference: you cannot 'mask' against the new tests.
Firing and damaging ones records due to intentional 'fuzzy or mumbling communications' and making employee lose time and money is ridiculous. I'd be happy peeing in a jar every time I was at terminal for them. Obviously, every time the company wants to escape a liability, this tactic, dac, or even a hazmat misunderstanding are a driver's triple threat and intentional harassment. And there is no recourse the drivers (or any employees to a lesser degree) have against unjust career marks carved in stone on their record. All drivers are just happy to get it off their record and think think they won. They have just lost less, but in no way was fairly compensated for the intentional wrong doing. Hitler would have been proud of these tactics to manipulate his soldiers. You can systematically prevent undesirable behavior, or you can systematically harass and destroy careers. Any behavior tech knows negatively reinforcing behavior patterns has undesirable effects on overall employee population. duh! In other words, Fredog and his boss relationship is fully living up to the policy of the law. The procedures of the law stinks and are testing technology-wise outdated. The procedures are used to trap devients, not for the company to to trap honest employees they choose for whatever reason they rationalize whenever they want. |
Originally Posted by ddog
The procedures are used to trap devients, not for the company to to trap honest employees they choose for whatever reason they rationalize whenever they want.
Any driver who has been driving for six years, as Mikee claims he had been, should know that there is no such thing as "a couple of days fair warning" on a drug test, nor is there any such thing as "I'll get to it tommorrow". He should have gone to take his drug test when he was told to. Personally, based upon the inconsistancies that I found in Mikee's IP, I'm really inclined to believe that there is a whole other side to this story that we haven't been told. I'm absolutely no fan of SWIFT, but I'll side with them on this one!! In any event, guess Mikee's been doing double-time at The Golden Arches, since we've not heard from him since he tried to "educate" me about HIPPA!! I STILL get a laugh looking back at that!! |
Originally Posted by TruckerManMikee
I was told that afternoon by driver manager that I could go in the morning and he said OK. HE never said IMMEDIATLY or your terminated. I weould have left right away it was a MISCOMMUNICATION.
I believe that when someone is called for a random, they are supposed to be instructed that they have four hours in which to get it done. In any event, with 6 years under his belt, Mikee should have known that. now they are getting me for refusal due to his not wanting to be honest and saying it was misunderstood on both parts and there was NO FAIR WARNING no coupkle days in advance or I would have been there beforehand. This part is really a joke; "a couple of days fair warning?? Im going to be in contact with DOT in washington im not letting this one lay down HIPPA rules even in effect they wanted me to discuss my medical situation in a room full of other drivers taking test. This is where Mikee trips over his own shoe laces; if he never showed up for the test, then hoe could he have been asked to discuss his medical situation in a room filled with other drivers?? In any event, I'm sure that the folks in the HIPPA office enjoyed a good laugh over this one!! I was humilitated,embarrassed,shocked, they dumped me and my lady on the street with no way to get home Sucks to be Mikee!! |
Originally Posted by Useless
Originally Posted by ddog
The procedures are used to trap devients, not for the company to to trap honest employees they choose for whatever reason they rationalize whenever they want.
Any driver who has been driving for six years, as Mikee claims he had been, should know that there is no such thing as "a couple of days fair warning" on a drug test, nor is there any such thing as "I'll get to it tommorrow". He should have gone to take his drug test when he was told to. Personally, based upon the inconsistancies that I found in Mikee's IP, I'm really inclined to believe that there is a whole other side to this story that we haven't been told. I'm absolutely no fan of SWIFT, but I'll side with them on this one!! In any event, guess Mikee's been doing double-time at The Golden Arches, since we've not heard from him since he tried to "educate" me about HIPPA!! I STILL get a laugh looking back at that!! |
Originally Posted by ddog
Originally Posted by Useless
Originally Posted by ddog
The procedures are used to trap devients, not for the company to to trap honest employees they choose for whatever reason they rationalize whenever they want.
Any driver who has been driving for six years, as Mikee claims he had been, should know that there is no such thing as "a couple of days fair warning" on a drug test, nor is there any such thing as "I'll get to it tommorrow". He should have gone to take his drug test when he was told to. Personally, based upon the inconsistancies that I found in Mikee's IP, I'm really inclined to believe that there is a whole other side to this story that we haven't been told. I'm absolutely no fan of SWIFT, but I'll side with them on this one!! In any event, guess Mikee's been doing double-time at The Golden Arches, since we've not heard from him since he tried to "educate" me about HIPPA!! I STILL get a laugh looking back at that!! lets beat this subject to death, I got nothing else to do right now. in our case, we are a small company, to get a drug test. we have to call the local doctor and get an appointment. I then have to park the truck at the yard and drive over to the doctor. so thats why I was told to get it the next time I was in, he want going to route me to the shop and make me miss a load. now if I had a wreck or was suspect, then that would have been entirely different |
:roll:
No one is beating the thread to death, Fredog!! No one is forced to read it nor is anyone forced to post. |
Originally Posted by Useless
:roll:
No one is beating the thread to death, Fredog!! No one is forced to read it nor is anyone forced to post. some of the people on here act like they are forced to read every post. they complain about posts that dont interest them or dont agree with them, they way some of them complain, you would think they were truck drivers :lol: :rock: |
Originally Posted by Fredog
Originally Posted by Useless
:roll:
No one is beating the thread to death, Fredog!! No one is forced to read it nor is anyone forced to post. some of the people on here act like they are forced to read every post. they complain about posts that dont interest them or dont agree with them, they way some of them complain, you would think they were truck drivers :lol: :rock: |
Originally Posted by Useless
Originally Posted by Fredog
Originally Posted by Useless
:roll:
No one is beating the thread to death, Fredog!! No one is forced to read it nor is anyone forced to post. some of the people on here act like they are forced to read every post. they complain about posts that dont interest them or dont agree with them, they way some of them complain, you would think they were truck drivers :lol: :rock: what horse? I'm not arguing, (I think) I just thought people were tired of hearing me, I will be glad to ramble on forever or at least until I get sleepy :shock: |
Originally Posted by Fredog
what horse?
I'm not arguing, (I think) I just thought people were tired of hearing me, I will be glad to ramble on forever or at least until I get sleepy :shock: Or, you can get on the "Tin Can CB" airwaves!! (SEE: And The Survey Says?? Forum, "What Kind of Radio?" Thread) DAYUMM!! I had to dry the Diet Coke (drink, not the drug!!) off of my keyboard after that one!! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: STILL ROFLMAO |
Originally Posted by Useless
Originally Posted by Fredog
what horse?
I'm not arguing, (I think) I just thought people were tired of hearing me, I will be glad to ramble on forever or at least until I get sleepy :shock: Or, you can get on the "Tin Can CB" airwaves!! (SEE: And The Survey Says?? Forum, "What Kind of Radio?" Thread) DAYUMM!! I had to dry the Diet Coke (drink, not the drug!!) off of my keyboard after that one!! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: STILL ROFLMAO |
what is hippa?
|
Originally Posted by TonyandDeb
what is hippa?
See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_...untability_Act kc0iv |
Poor Mikee...
I read all this last night and had to wait for my registration to be approved before I could make a few comments. First, he said that he had been driving for 6 years, I'll bet not with Swift. Second, He probably wasn't the twinkle in Swift's eye, he did or continue to do stuff that was pissing them off. Third, They set him up to be fired and he fell for it. They have probably been waiting for the opportunity for months to terminate him without recourse. Fourth, His "I'll do it tomorrow" attitude was probably the root of all his troubles. This reminded me of an incident at a company that I drove for in the 70's. There was a driver that managed to screw up by the numbers every chance he got and fortunately nobody got killed or injured. It got to the point of a contest to be the person to fire this guy. One afternoon I was in the office and the terminal manager got a phone call from the vice president of the company that he just got the honors of firing Richard at the terminal in Savannah. My TM was upset that he didn't get to do it. But back to the point: Mikee doesn't have a leg to stand on. Swift 1, Mikee 0. |
Re: DRUG TESTING PLEASE HELP
Originally Posted by TruckerManMikee
I have been terminated from SWIFT Trucking due to Miscommunication with driver manager due to a drug test he said ASAP then he told saftey that he told me immediatly. me and the better half are stuck in Mesa AZ with all our luggage and they wont even pay our way home expect for a bus fare. ythat means we have to somehow take and leave stuff that means alot to us and get rid of the rest and as they say I refused a drug test which was wrong as i went within 24hrs had I know it was urgent I would have left as soon as possible.im at my daughters house til we figure out what to do I FEEL SO SICK due to this in 6 yrs driving ive never refused or failed a DOT test ever plz help with REAL ADVICE,im lost
http://www.dotjobhistory.com/articles/Randomtest.asp |
Re: DRUG TESTING PLEASE HELP
Originally Posted by Senorjhawk
If you get selected for a "random"..... you get it done "30 minutes ago". you do not have 24 hrs or a couple of days to "getroundtuit"...... If anything....even if you have never even looked at drugs in your life, this is one issue that will bring your driving career to a dead stop in the water. If you get nailed for ailing to get it done "30 minutes ago".....you're done! Your only two outs that I know of are "death" and hospitalization at the time you are selected....other than being on actual vacation. DO NOT PLAY GAMES WITH THIS ISSUE! |
Yes, the article was informative and a good read. But any TEST should be based on the REGS, and not just this article. Not enough info here.
1) I believe the REGS say you have 2 hours (not 4, Useless...) to COMPLETE the test. (I did not check this fact at this moment, but it is MY understanding of it.) 2) I may have used the wrong word when saying the "boss" broke the LAW. These ARE regulations, and breaking them can cost you your license, or authority (for the employer,) but not necessarily get you jail time. If you no longer care to drive a truck..... go ahead and flaunt them! 3) The FMCSA and DOT do not CARE if your boss TRUSTS you! The regulations/procedures MUST be followed for ALL CDL holders, (and carriers,) without regard to what the employer THINKS he knows about an employee. 4) Yes, there are all KINDS of "ways around" telling an employee of a random.... but they do NOT include TELLING him of a random and then giving him some leeway as to WHEN to do it. Once the telling is done.... the procedure is on a clock that NO ONE has control over. 5) For example..... my company has a chalkboard up that says, "the following people need to see [one of our personnel employees.]" This IS a code of sorts, but it meets the letter of the regulation. You will not be officially "notified" until you see that person! Other companies use the wording, "Come see me when you get on the yard." 6) But, ONCE an employee (DER) informs a driver that he has been selected.... there can BE NO delay except as noted in the REGS. I feel sorry for Mikee, but he SHOULD have been aware of the regs. It is OUR responsibility to KNOW them.... IF we want to be truck drivers. The company DID (it seems) offer to pay bus fare home.... at which time Mikee could have taken his POV and a trailer back to get the stuff that he SHOULD have put in storage somewhere. The company is under NO obligation to buy him a plane ticket, or rent him a U-Haul! And, although they did NOT have to terminate him, they absolutely could NOT allow him to continue to drive the truck! To reaffirm my previous statement..... Fredog's boss was in violation of the Regulations that afford him his Carrier authority IF he TOLD an employee that he needed to submit to a test, but gave him more than 2 hours to complete it! A carrier is expressly forbidden from doing so BY the REGS!! His boss violated the regs under which his "authority" is governed, and could LOSE his business if it became KNOWN to the DOT. Hence.... my statement about squeezing him for a raise! :wink: Hobo |
Wow. This thread is still around? :shock:
:lol: :P |
Originally Posted by golfhobo
Yes, the article was informative and a good read. But any TEST should be based on the REGS, and not just this article. Not enough info here.
1) I believe the REGS say you have 2 hours (not 4, Useless...) to COMPLETE the test. (I did not check this fact at this moment, but it is MY understanding of it.) Hobo §382.305 Random testing. (l) Each employer shall require that each driver who is notified of selection for random alcohol and/or controlled substances testing proceeds to the test site immediately; provided, however, that if the driver is performing a safety-sensitive function, other than driving a commercial motor vehicle, at the time of notification, the employer shall instead ensure that the driver ceases to perform the safety- sensitive function and proceeds to the testing site as soon as possible. Interpretation for Part 382: Controlled Substances and Alcohol Use and Testing Question 17: May an employer notify a driver of his/her selection for a random controlled sub*stances test while the driver is in an off-duty status? Guidance: Yes. Part 382 does not prohibit an employer form notifying a driver of his/her selection for a random controlled substances test while the driver is in an off-duty status. If an employer selects a driver for a random controlled substances test while the driver is in an off-duty status, and then chooses to notify the driver that he/she has been selected while the driver is still off-duty, the employer must ensure that the driver proceeds immediately to a collection site. Immediately, in this context, means that all the driver’s actions, after notification, lead to an immediate specimen collection. If the employer’s policy or practice is to notify drivers while they are in an off-duty status, the employer should make that policy clear to all drivers so that they are fully informed of their obligation to proceed immediately to a col*lection site. If an employer does not want to notify the driver that he/she has been selected for a random controlled substances test while the driver is in an off-duty status, the employer could set aside the driver’s name for notification until the driver returns to work, as long as the driver returns to work before the next selection for random testing is made. Question 21: If a driver has been notified of his/her selection of random drug and/or alcohol testing and the testing cannot be completed because of “unforeseeable obstacles” at the collection site (i.e. collection site closed, collector unavailable when driver shows up, emergency such as a fire, natural disaster, etc…), what is the carrier’s responsibility? [Editor’s Note] Response: In accordance with §382.305(i)(3) and §382.305(l), each driver selected for testing shall be tested during the selection period; and upon notification of selection for random alcohol and/or drug testing proceed to the collection site immediately. In instances of “unforeseeable obstacles” the driver shall immediately contact the employer’s DER for instructions to an alternative collection site. These “unforeseeable obstacles” do not negate the employer’s responsibility of ensuring that the required test be administered. [Editor’s Note] [i]This interpretation was issued after the interpretations were published in the Federal Register in April 1997.[i] kc0iv |
Yes..... I kNEW that statement would invite comment, which is why I added the caveat and emphasized the word COMPLETE. :lol:
The two hour figure is what I've been told by my safety department is a time limit by which I have to have the completed paperwork back to them, or at least the collection time on the paperwork must be no more than two hours after my notification. Don't really know, but I assume this comes from the HUGE book of regulations that THEY must adhere to. We forget sometimes.... that OUR regulations are not the ONLY ones that govern trucking. Many of the rules that THEY must follow are published in the Federal Register, as your citation indicates. I haven't the inclination to read it all to check on this information, but my employer tells me I have TWO hours. I don't normally make statements that I can't FIRST check out on my own, but I made an exception this time. :wink: |
Originally Posted by golfhobo
Yes, the article was informative and a good read. But any TEST should be based on the REGS, and not just this article. Not enough info here.
1) I believe the REGS say you have 2 hours (not 4, Useless...) to COMPLETE the test. (I did not check this fact at this moment, but it is MY understanding of it.) 2) I may have used the wrong word when saying the "boss" broke the LAW. These ARE regulations, and breaking them can cost you your license, or authority (for the employer,) but not necessarily get you jail time. If you no longer care to drive a truck..... go ahead and flaunt them! 3) The FMCSA and DOT do not CARE if your boss TRUSTS you! The regulations/procedures MUST be followed for ALL CDL holders, (and carriers,) without regard to what the employer THINKS he knows about an employee. 4) Yes, there are all KINDS of "ways around" telling an employee of a random.... but they do NOT include TELLING him of a random and then giving him some leeway as to WHEN to do it. Once the telling is done.... the procedure is on a clock that NO ONE has control over. 5) For example..... my company has a chalkboard up that says, "the following people need to see [one of our personnel employees.]" This IS a code of sorts, but it meets the letter of the regulation. You will not be officially "notified" until you see that person! Other companies use the wording, "Come see me when you get on the yard." 6) But, ONCE an employee (DER) informs a driver that he has been selected.... there can BE NO delay except as noted in the REGS. I feel sorry for Mikee, but he SHOULD have been aware of the regs. It is OUR responsibility to KNOW them.... IF we want to be truck drivers. The company DID (it seems) offer to pay bus fare home.... at which time Mikee could have taken his POV and a trailer back to get the stuff that he SHOULD have put in storage somewhere. The company is under NO obligation to buy him a plane ticket, or rent him a U-Haul! And, although they did NOT have to terminate him, they absolutely could NOT allow him to continue to drive the truck! To reaffirm my previous statement..... Fredog's boss was in violation of the Regulations that afford him his Carrier authority IF he TOLD an employee that he needed to submit to a test, but gave him more than 2 hours to complete it! A carrier is expressly forbidden from doing so BY the REGS!! His boss violated the regs under which his "authority" is governed, and could LOSE his business if it became KNOWN to the DOT. Hence.... my statement about squeezing him for a raise! :wink: Hobo http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/rules-regul...ction_toc=1287 The "salient part where Drivers and Time allowed to complete is C & P below: (l) Each employer shall require that each driver who is notified of selection for random alcohol and/or controlled substances testing proceeds to the test site immediately; provided, however, that if the driver is performing a safety-sensitive function, other than driving a commercial motor vehicle, at the time of notification, the employer shall instead ensure that the driver ceases to perform the safety- sensitive function and proceeds to the testing site as soon as possible. (m) A driver shall only be tested for alcohol 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. And from this regulation cited above stems this "Guidance" which appears on the same site and is located here: http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/rules-regul...287&guidence=Y Question 17: May an employer notify a driver of his/her selection for a random controlled sub?stances test while the driver is in an off-duty status? Guidance: Yes. Part 382 does not prohibit an employer form notifying a driver of his/her selection for a random controlled substances test while the driver is in an off-duty status. If an employer selects a driver for a random controlled substances test while the driver is in an off-duty status, and then chooses to notify the driver that he/she has been selected while the driver is still off-duty, the employer must ensure that the driver proceeds immediately to a collection site. Immediately, in this context, means that all the driver?s actions, after notification, lead to an immediate speci?men collection. If the employer?s policy or practice is to notify drivers while they are in an off-duty status, the employer should make that policy clear to all drivers so that they are fully informed of their obligation to proceed immediately to a collection site. If an employer does not want to notify the driver that he/she has been selected for a random controlled substances test while the driver is in an off-duty status, the employer could set aside the driver?s name for notification until the driver returns to work, as long as the driver returns to work before the next selection for random testing is made. Employers should note that regardless of when a driver is notified, the time the driver spends traveling to and from the collection site, and all time associated with providing the specimen, must be recorded as on-duty time for purposes of compliance with the hours-of-service rules. Interestingly enough....nowhere in either the regulations or the guidance...is there any mention of "allowed amounts of time" to accomplish the mission.... only the words stating the driver must proceed immediately subject a couple of conditions. So there is interpretive room in the regulations.....however, it is not a "getroundtuit" situation....it simply means ASAP in a very definite manner. And I can also see where this regulation and its guidance could be used to eliminate a driver from the fleet with just a modicum of manipulation by a dispatcher.... :shock: [/i] |
Skywalker said (among other things):
Interestingly enough....nowhere in either the regulations or the guidance...is there any mention of "allowed amounts of time" to accomplish the mission.... only the words stating the driver must proceed immediately subject a couple of conditions. So there is interpretive room in the regulations.....however, it is not a "getroundtuit" situation....it simply means ASAP in a very definite manner. Futhermore, the part that I quoted from your post above, neglects what I stated about the fact that Safety Depts have OTHER regulations and guidance concerning the program that WE are not privy to, if we only search the FMCSA site. Granted, the 2 hour stipulation MAY only be a "company policy" in my case. I REALLY don't know. I just know that they tell me I MUST get it completed within TWO HOURS! I will ask them about the source/reason for that, and get back to y'all! :wink: And here's one that I can't find any comment on..... If you just finished your 11 hours for the day, and are off duty on a required 10 hour break, HOW can they force you to drive over your HOS to a clinic for a random, which MUST be done "on duty" ??????? Which would trump?? The random testing regs? Or the HOS regs? :shock: |
Originally Posted by golfhobo
Skywalker said (among other things):
Interestingly enough....nowhere in either the regulations or the guidance...is there any mention of "allowed amounts of time" to accomplish the mission.... only the words stating the driver must proceed immediately subject a couple of conditions. So there is interpretive room in the regulations.....however, it is not a "getroundtuit" situation....it simply means ASAP in a very definite manner. Futhermore, the part that I quoted from your post above, neglects what I stated about the fact that Safety Depts have OTHER regulations and guidance concerning the program that WE are not privy to, if we only search the FMCSA site. Granted, the 2 hour stipulation MAY only be a "company policy" in my case. I REALLY don't know. I just know that they tell me I MUST get it completed within TWO HOURS! I will ask them about the source/reason for that, and get back to y'all! :wink: I know that when I was at CFI...the "only" times I was ever subjected to the "random" testing was after my arrival at a terminal location. You got called to local dispatch...handed the notice with a map to the location, and told to "go right now" and report back when completed. It usually happened in Laredo. And here's one that I can't find any comment on..... If you just finished your 11 hours for the day, and are off duty on a required 10 hour break, HOW can they force you to drive over your HOS to a clinic for a random, which MUST be done "on duty" ??????? Which would trump?? The random testing regs? Or the HOS regs? :shock: However...the more salient questions are these: Are you, at the time of "notification"...at a location where you can easily go to the testing site? Is it a site that has truck parking? Is it within a reasonable distance that you could take a cab? Would the company reimburse for the cab ride? Is the Director of Safety for the company willing to send you a message via Qualcomm/Mmax.... or other stored means (email, etc) giving you a direct order to violate HOS, or permission to wait until break is up. 8) You sure like to throw rocks at hornets nests...don't you?? 8) |
Originally Posted by golfhobo
Skywalker said (among other things):
Interestingly enough....nowhere in either the regulations or the guidance...is there any mention of "allowed amounts of time" to accomplish the mission.... only the words stating the driver must proceed immediately subject a couple of conditions. So there is interpretive room in the regulations.....however, it is not a "getroundtuit" situation....it simply means ASAP in a very definite manner. Futhermore, the part that I quoted from your post above, neglects what I stated about the fact that Safety Depts have OTHER regulations and guidance concerning the program that WE are not privy to, if we only search the FMCSA site. Granted, the 2 hour stipulation MAY only be a "company policy" in my case. I REALLY don't know. I just know that they tell me I MUST get it completed within TWO HOURS! I will ask them about the source/reason for that, and get back to y'all! :wink: And here's one that I can't find any comment on..... If you just finished your 11 hours for the day, and are off duty on a required 10 hour break, HOW can they force you to drive over your HOS to a clinic for a random, which MUST be done "on duty" ??????? Which would trump?? The random testing regs? Or the HOS regs? :shock: D. What must employees do when notified of a random test? When an employee is notified, he or she must proceed immediately to the collection site. Contrary to the urban legends circulating among some employees, immediately does not mean two hours. Immediately means that after notification, all the employee’s actions must lead to an immediate specimen collection |
Originally Posted by Jackrabbit379
Wow. This thread is still around? :shock: :lol: :P
He IS trying to get back into driving, but is having a hard time finding a company that will give him a couple of days fair warning on drug tests!! :P |
Originally Posted by Useless
Yeah, and TruckerManMikee is now long forgotten, having completed the SAP number , and toilling away at BurgerLand!!
He IS trying to get back into driving, but is having a hard time finding a company that will give him a couple of days fair warning on drug tests!! :P I kinda figured. :P |
Originally Posted by Skywalker
I think one of your key issues is the information contained in the FMCSR's, Subpart 1, 40.191.... (a) (1) deals with refusal issues... and the key wording here is your issue. Fail to appear for any test (except a pre-employment test) within a reasonable time, as determined by the employer, consistent with applicable DOT agency regulations, after being directed to do so by the employer.......
What is at issue is this: How much time were you given, based upon the exact wording of the message you recieved? Were you told where to go and where to report to? If not, did you immediately contact Safety, and ask them? Have you spoken with Swift's Director of Safety, and has he/she read the actual message that you received? Was it via Qualcomm? If so, that message if it says ASAP, is still in the system, and the dispatchers word that it was to be immediate is suspect. However.....if the message was given to you verbally....its another nest of problems. If your service and performance record their is good, I can't see why there is a problem. If you got it done within 24 hours....it should be a non-issue. If you have no issues with Swift, its hard to understand why they would terminate you. However, 382.305, (l), states: Each employer shall require that each driver who is notified for selection for random alcohol/and or controlled substance testing proceeds to the test site "immediately"; provided, however that if the driver is performing a safety-sensitive function other than driving a commercial motor vehicle, at the time of notification, the employer shall instead ensure that the driver ceases to perform the safety sensitive function and proceeds to to the testing site as soon as possible. So it seems that in one sense you are between a rock and a hard spot. Did you ever report for the test and give the required sample. If yes, then the results will speak for themself. If not, then you will be noted as having refused to take said test.....which is bad. If you took the test and come up "clean", then Swift shot themself in the ass. You need to get a copy of the results....even if you have to go to that clinic and get them. If you are clean, then those results will show your "good faith" and keep you "employable". If you did not take the test as required.... you shot yourself in the foot, badly. I realize that you said that you went within 24 hours....but you didn't say if you completed the procedure. Folks, this is an issue that must be addressed right exactly when you are notified. You get the where and when from your company.....and get it done....no matter what, and yes, your company can even notify you when you are on "time-off" at home or anywhere....and yes, according to part 382....you must proceed "immediately" to the testing site. This will not appear in the regular FMCSR book, but it is contained in the answer to question 17 regarding this subject in the guidance book. Good luck on your problem. wording doesn't matter. you have 2 hours!! that's it. when they tell you, they have a responsibiliy to get you directions to the facility. they will pay for taxi's or whatever. but it is their job to make it accessible to you. however it is you job to convey to them ANY troubles you may have, traffic, can't fit in the parking lot, etc. other than that, 2 hrs. and the clock is ticking. |
Originally Posted by tinman789
wording doesn't matter. you have 2 hours!! that's it. when they tell you, they have a responsibiliy to get you directions to the facility. they will pay for taxi's or whatever. but it is their job to make it accessible to you. however it is you job to convey to them ANY troubles you may have, traffic, can't fit in the parking lot, etc. other than that, 2 hrs. and the clock is ticking.
wording doesn't matter. you have 2 hours!! that's it. when they tell you, they have a responsibiliy to get you directions to the facility. they will pay for taxi's or whatever. but it is their job to make it accessible to you. however it is you job to convey to them ANY troubles you may have, traffic, can't fit in the parking lot, etc. other than that, 2 hrs. and the clock is ticking. The only reference I find for there being a 2 hour limit is the one I quoted from: http://www.dot.gov/ost/dapc/testingp...m_brochure.pdf and it calls it an urban legend. The only rule I find says proceeds to the test site immediately. See: §382.305 kc0iv |
I have a question?
I think the company is supposed to drug test me when I first started working there, but they never did. I am doing anything illegal by driving? since they never told me to do a test? isn't it their responsibility to tell me when and where to go test? |
Originally Posted by bikerboy
I have a question?
I think the company is supposed to drug test me when I first started working there, but they never did. I am doing anything illegal by driving? since they never told me to do a test? isn't it their responsibility to tell me when and where to go test? kc0iv |
I Know canada doesn't do drug testing, but i truck into the USA, and i think the company is supposed to test me then! But they never did
|
Why do BAT 5 drugs
There are plethora of prescription drugs that are not included in the BAT 5 so why do drugs that are included in the test? It's just stupid. Understand the rules and play by them. You can blast down the road with a head full of Oxy and never worry about failing a random drug test.
From what I have heard, the prescription (and non-tested) drugs are far superior to any "street" drugs. |
| All times are GMT -12. The time now is 05:52 AM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved