Ruling claims Connecticut drug testing laws apply only to urinalysis drug tests

The ruling was made in the case of Schofield v. Loureiro Engineering Associates, Inc., in which the plaintiff was terminated as a result of a pre-employment hair analysis drug test – a practice that he claimed was a violation of state drug testing laws.

The court concluded that several state statutes supported the plaintiff’s claims, including:

• The prohibition of employers from determining an employee’s eligibility for various personnel actions solely based on the result of a positive drug test, unless that test was a urinalysis and a second positive result was confirmed by an additional, independent urinalysis drug test;
• The prohibition of employers from requiring prospective employees to submit to urinalysis drug tests unless the employer informs those prospective employees in writing of their intent to perform such a test at the time of application; and
• The prohibition of employers from requiring employees to submit to a urinalysis drug test unless there is a reasonable suspicion from the employer that the employee in question is under the influence of drugs or alcohol, as defined by the law.

While the court subsequently ruled that the plaintiff could indeed plead a claim of wrongful discharge in violation of public policy, they did so while recognizing the “irrational inconsistency which flows from the disparate protections [of the statutes],” but placed the responsibility for the rectification of those inconsistencies with the states legislature, not the courts.

Source: Jackson Lewis PC, 6/19/2015

Posted: July 2, 2015