Idaho Drug Laws
We are going to explore two aspects of Idaho drug laws and the information necessary to learn how to pass a drug test in Idaho.
Learning The Basics Of Idaho Drug Laws.
First, we are not attorneys and can not provide specific advice on the Idaho Drug Laws. It is very important you seek professional advice skilled with legal advice that is familiar with the ins and outs of local Idaho drug laws.
Second, for those of you who are concerned with those Idaho Drug Laws being applied to you, we offer information on the major just four major drug tests one might be facing in Idaho.
There Are Four Major Drug Tests Given In Idaho.
Each drug test has its own specific strengths you must avoid and weakness in which one can take advantage. What you learn here could make the difference between failing and passing a drug test in Idaho.
Idaho Drug Laws For Employees.
Idaho Drug Laws allow drug testing in certain situations as long as the employer follows the procedural rules. Idaho employers with a drug-free workplace program must test employees in the following circumstances:
- after an accident resulting in lost work time.
- on reasonable suspicion of drug use (reasons for suspicion must be documented and made available to the employee on request).
- as part of a routinely scheduled fitness-for-duty medical examination.
- after the employee returns to work following rehabilitation for a positing drug test. Testing is not required if the employee entered rehab voluntarily, rather than after a positive drug test.
In addition, employers may conduct random drug testing as they see fit.
Rules for Job Applicants in Idaho.
Idaho employers are allowed to drug test applicants as a condition of employment. The employer must have a written drug testing policy that is available for applicants to review.
An applicant who doesn’t accept an otherwise suitable job because the employer requires drug testing may lose eligibility for unemployment benefits. In this situation, the applicant could be deemed unwilling to accept suitable work, and therefore not fully available and searching for a new job.
Notice and Procedural Rights for Employees.
An employer must have a written drug testing policy that details the types of testing employees may be subject to and states that violation of the policy may resulting in termination due to misconduct.
An employee or applicant who tests positive may request a retest within seven working days. The employer may not take action based on an initial positive result that has not been verified by a confirmation test.
Procedures for gathering specimens, conducting the test, confidentiality, and so on are specified by state law.
Legal Claims Arising From Drug Testing.
Have you been illegally asked or required to take a drug test in Idaho? Even though Idaho Drug Laws allow an employer to drug test, many employees and might may have legal claims based on how the test was conducted, who was tested or how the results were used.
Here are some examples:
- Violation of Idaho Drug Laws And Procedures. Although an employer has the legal right to test, it must follow the state’s requirements. An Idaho employer that doesn’t provide the required notice of its testing policy or observe state procedural rights (for example, by failing to conduct a confirmation test after an initial positive result or by allowing unauthorized personnel to perform the test) could face legal problems.
- Disability Discrimination. An applicant or employee who is taking medication for a disability is protected by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Some prescribed medications turn up on drug tests and some drugs that would otherwise be illegal (such as opiates) are legitimately prescribed for certain conditions. If an applicant is turned down because of a positive drug test and the applicant’s medication was legally prescribed for a disability, the company could be liable.
- Other Discrimination Claims. An employer who singles out certain groups of employees – for example, by race, age, or gender – for drug testing could face a discrimination claim.
- Invasion Of Privacy. Even an employer that is allowed or required to test might violate employee privacy in the way it conducts the test. For example, requiring employees to disrobe or provide a urine sample in front of others could be a privacy violation.
- Defamation. An employee might have a valid claim for defamation if the employer ( that the employee tested positive, if the employer has reason to know that the test might not be accurate. For example, if a retest showed that the first test was a false positive or the employee has appealed the first test, the employer may be liable for revealing the results of the positive test beyond those with a need to know.
NOLO – Legal Encyclopedia – Idaho Laws on Workplace Drug Testing.
Breakdown Of Idaho Drug Laws.
|Statute of Order:||Idaho Code §72-1701 et seq.|
|Covered Employers:||All employers.|
|Applicant Testing:||Testing authorized as a condition of employment.|
|Employee Testing:||Testing authorized, including random testing, after notice to employees. Policy must list types of tests and state that violation is grounds for misconduct discharge. Unemployment benefits may be denied for discharge because of positive result, refusal to be tested, or altering results.|
|Conditions & Methods:||Confirming test after positive results, confidentiality of test, and methods of collection, storage, and transportation that ensure noncontamination of specimen.|
|Testing Bullet Points:||
The Idaho Drug Law For Marijuana Possession.
The Vast Majority Of Drug Test Failures in Idaho Are For Breaking Idaho Drug Laws For Marijuana, Not Federal Or Local Laws.
Idaho drug laws have their own specific strengths you must avoid and weakness in which one can take advantage when it comes to marijuana. The same is true of the Federal Laws concerning marijuana.
Marijuana is the third most popular recreational drug in Idaho behind only alcohol and tobacco. Marijuana has been used by nearly 100 million Americans at one time or another with an equal cross-section of people in Idaho using marijuana. According to the federal government, some 25 million Americans have smoked marijuana in the past year and more than 14 million do so regularly despite harsh laws against its use. Idaho is no exception in its implementation of marijuana law.
Unlike alcohol, for which impairment can be reasonably measured using a breathalyzer, valid detection for marijuana requires drug testing. This is time-consuming, complicated and the drug tests for marijuana cannot determine an approximate degree of impairment. The detection of marijuana is also complicated by the various types of drug testing available and the types of myths, half-truths and rumors that surround marijuana drug testing.
Overview Of Idaho Drug Test Laws.
- Voluntary State – Idaho is a voluntary state. Therefore, employers looking for the 5% insurance discount should conduct the tests as per state Law. When the employer is not seeking that discount, the common Law would apply. Except when specifically mentioned otherwise, the provisions shall apply only to those employers who seek state protection.
- Policy – Private employers shall present a written policy on alcohol/drug testing. The policy shall incorporate a statement that violation can cause termination on account of misconduct. The policy should be made available to all affected employees. Prospective employees also shall be provided an opportunity to review the policy.
- Notice – Any employee having tested positive for drugs or alcohol must be provided with a written notice conveying the test result and the substance involved. The employee shall be given an opportunity to explain and discuss the result an MRO or a qualified person.
- Costs – All ‘required’ costs are paid for by the employer. Test time is deemed to be work time. Cost of an eventual retest to be paid by the employee, except when a re-test returns a negative result.
- Consequences – No limit whatsoever has been prescribed on discipline. However, when employers seek state protection/benefits, the following shall apply. Violation of the employer’s policy furnished in writing shall invite disciplinary action including refusal to hire. The claimant (employee) in such cases shall also not be eligible to receive state benefits. Actions taken by employer in pursuance of these provisions shall not become cause of action against the employer.
- For Whom? – This is not specified in particular. However, in the case of employers seeking state benefits/protection, all employees are subjected to testing. Public employers may, however, establish their own DFWA program.
- Substances identified for testing – A covered employer can test for Marijuana (Cannabinoids), amphetamines, Cocaine (benzoylecgonine) Opiates (morphine, heroin and codeine) and PCP, apart from Alcohol.
- Type of tests – Pre-employment, baseline, Post-accident, Return to duty, Random, Follow-up and reasonable suspicion are the permitted test categories under the voluntary state Law. However, the tests are not limited to what has been mentioned here.
- Procedure for test – Only trained personnel can collect for drug tests. Sample testing should conform to scientific analytical procedures and methods. Confirmatory test is required before using the results for action by employer. A confirmatory test is a mandatory test using Chromatographic technique or other analytical methods which are comparable and reliable. Employee/prospective employee can request a retest of identical sample at a lab mutually agreed. Such a request shall be made not later than 7 days from the date of the initial confirmed positive result notification. The associated costs are to be borne by the employee/prospective employee.
- State Peculiarities – Unemployment benefits cannot be claimed by an employee if he fails to accept suitable work because an alcohol/drug test forms a pre-employment routine. An exception would be when the employee/claimant is paying for a test which returns negative results. A private employer can avail all state benefits even when its testing policy does not conform to state Laws. But, a testing policy duly negotiated with a ‘collective bargaining representative’ or forming part of a collective agreement.