Pre-Employment 3.8% 3.8%
Random 2.7% 2.9%
Returned to Duty 4.8% 5.9%
Positive Rates By Drug Category
(For Federally Mandated, Safety-Sensitive Workforce, as a percentage of all such tests)
(More than 650,000 tests from January to December, 1998)
Drug Category 1998 1997
Amphetamines 0.25% 0.30%
Cocaine 0.78% 0.73%
Marijuana 1.87% 2.0%
Opiates 0.49% 0.53%
PCP 0.05% 0.04%
Positive Rates By Drug Category
(For General U.S. Workforce, as a percentage of all such tests)
(More than 5 million tests from January to December, 1998)
Drug Category 1998 1997
Amphetamines 0.20% 0.26%
Barbiturates 0.38% 0.35%
Benzodiazepines 0.55% 0.59%
Cocaine 0.91% 0.90%
Marijuana 3.17% 3.4%
Methadone 0.06% 0.07%
Opiates 0.50% 0.50%
PCP 0.01% 0.01%
Propoxyphene 0.29% 0.27%
(Johnson)
EXHIBIT 3
Positive Results By Drug Category
(For Federally Mandated, Safety-Sensitive Workers, as a percentage of all positives)
(More than 650,000 tests from January to December, 1998)
Drug Category 1998 1997
Amphetamines 7.1% 8.1%
Cocaine 22.3% 20%
Marijuana 54.7% 56%
Nitrites 0.32% NA%
Opiates 14% 15%
PCP 1.6% 1.2%
Positive Results By Drug Category
(For Combined U.S. Workforce, as a percentage of All Positives)
(More than 5.7 million tests from January to December, 1998)
Drug Category 1998 1997
Amphetamines 4.0% 4.9%
Barbiturates 3.0% 3.0%
Benzodiazepines 3.4% 3.9%
Cocaine 17.6% 16%
Marijuana 59.2% 60%
Methadone 0.36% 0.41%
Methaqualone 0.0007% 0.0002%
Nitrites 0.63% NA%
Opiates 9.7% 9.4%
PCP 0.37% 0.34%
Propoxyphene 1.7% 1.6%
Rates By Testing Positivity Reason
(For General Workforce)
(More than 5 million tests from January to December, 1998)
Testing Reason 1998 1997
For Cause 25.3% 26.7%
Periodic 4.9% 5.2%
Post-Accident 6.4% 6.8%
Pre-Employment 4.6% 4.7%
Random 7.3% 8.3%
Returned to Duty 7.2% 6.1%
(Johnson)
EXHIBIT 4
EXHIBT 5 (Johnson)
(Johnson)
Exhibit 6
Anderson, Sean. “Individual Privacy Interests and the Special Needs
Analysis for Involuntary Drug and HIV Tests.” California Law Review
January 1998: 119-177.
Bina, Chris. “Drug Testing 101: Detecting Tainted Samples.” Corrections
Today October 1998: 122-127.
Brady, Teresa. “Bad Hair Days.” Management Review February 1997: 59-61.
Curry, Sheree. “Big Brother Wants a Closer Look at Your Hair.” Fortune
June 23, 1997: 163.
Flynn, Gillian. “How to Prescribe Drug Testing.” Workforce January 1999:
107-109.
Hawkins, Dana. “Trial by Vial.” U.S. News & World Report May 31, 1999: 70-
72.
Johnson, Thomas. “Drug Testing Positvity Rates Down 65% in Past Decade.”
SmithKlein Beecham March 16, 1999: n. page. Online. Internet. 5 August 1999. Available:drugs.indiana.edu/drug_stats/home.html
Kean, Leslie. “More Than a Hair Off.” The Progressive May 1999: 32-36.
Levy, James. “Stress at Work.” Baltimore Business Journal February 24,
1997: 17-20.
Peck, Jeanne Peck. “Workplace Drug Testing Now a Fact of Life.” The
Orlando Sentinel January 19, 1998: 20-23.
Shoop, Bob. “Mandatory Drug Testing Violates Rights.” USA Today August
1996: 15-16.
“Why Drug Testing is Really Just Marijuana Testing.” Marijuana News
January 20, 1998: n. page. Online. Internet. 19 July 1999. Available:
marijuananews.com
Wodell, Russell. “The Facts About Drug Testing in the Workplace.” B.C. Civil
Liberties Association (1997) n.page. Online. Internet. 4 August 1999.
Available: bccla.org/positions/privacy/drugtest.html
“Workplace Drug Testing May Actually Promote Drug Use.” The Globe Daily
(1999)n. page. Online. Internet. 19 July 1999. Available: globedaily/
content/ 112398.