Sentences with phrase «safety sensitive workplaces»

There is no blanket standard that can be applied with regards to accommodation of medicinal marijuana use in safety sensitive workplaces.

However, because it was decided by an appellate court, it is likely to influence decisions made under human rights legislation in all Canadian jurisdictions, particularly those involving employer drug use policies in safety sensitive workplaces.

In this instance, it is reasonable to believe that random testing is a tool that would contribute towards a safer working environment in safety sensitive workplaces.

2) Confirmation Test — The rule also avoids the question as to whether or not the «Coast Guard should require a «confirmation'test after the initial screening to verify the presence and level of alcohol;» (This is a standard requirement for DOT safety sensitive workplace testing.)

Therefore, to implement testing, the employer must show that it is a safety sensitive workplace; there is evidence of a pervasive substance abuse problem which can be tied to the safety of the workplace; other less intrusive measures to deter substance abuse have failed, and testing must assess current impairment.

Today, a majority of the Supreme Court of Canada upheld an arbitration award which concluded that a random alcohol testing policy for use in a safety sensitive workplace was not justified.

Not exact matches

Future decisions, including the hearing in the Suncor case, should provide more clarity for employers seeking to institute similar policies in safety - sensitive workplaces.

It recognized the validity of deterring substance abuse in safety - sensitive environments, and asserted that workplace safety will be considered in assessing both an employer's policies and any analysis on an employer's duty to accommodate to the point of undue hardship.

In this case, a random search by the employer found a partially - consumed bottle of vodka in the trunk of the employee's vehicle, parked on Company property (which was a safety - sensitive workplace).

As well, the arbitrator's decision is silent with respect to the many arbitration decisions over the last decade or so which stand for the proposition that in safety - sensitive workplaces, the employer need not advance proof of an actual drug problem before adopting drug testing policies (which are of course far more intrusive than the use of drug sniffing dogs).

In a workplace that is dangerous, employers are generally entitled to test individual employees who occupy safety sensitive positions without having to show that alternative measures have been exhausted if there is «reasonable cause» to believe that the employee is impaired while on duty, where the employee has been directly involved in a workplace accident or significant incident, or where the employee is returning to work after treatment for substance abuse.

For workplace that is safety sensitive, there may not be alternatives to accommodate those unable to perform work in safety sensitive roles.

Although there was no dispute that the workplace was a dangerous one, the Supreme Court determined that the simple fact that a workplace might be «highly safety sensitive» or «inherently dangerous» did not, in and of itself, justify the implementation of a random alcohol testing policy.

Hopefully the Supreme Court will use this opportunity to lessen the legal ambiguity surrounding the use of mandatory random alcohol testing in safety - sensitive workplaces, as the provinces have been divergent on this issue.

Home Employment Law Alberta Court of Appeal decision supports random workplace drug testing in safety - sensitive workplaces

Alberta Court of Appeal decision supports random workplace drug testing in safety - sensitive workplaces

In doing so, the Supreme Court overturned the New Brunswick Court of Appeal's decision that had concluded that an employer can implement a policy for mandatory random alcohol testing so long as (1) the workplace is «inherently dangerous», and (2) the policy only applies to individuals in safety sensitive positions.

Further, the Supreme Court noted that safety has never been held to justify random testing even in the case of «highly safety sensitive» or «inherently dangerous workplaces» such as railways and chemical plants or those that pose a risk of explosion in the absence of a «demonstrated problem with alcohol use in that workplace» (CEP at para 45).

In a not insignificant footnote to the issue of drug and alcohol testing in the workplace, in Ontario, the Toronto Transit Commission was successful in defending an injunction brought by Local 113 of the Amalgamated Transit Union, attempting to prevent the implementation of random drug and alcohol testing in safety sensitive positions.

The Task Force heard concerns from experts and stakeholders about the impact of cannabis use in the workplace; particularly for people working in safety - sensitive positions.

Irving unilaterally adopted a workplace policy which included mandatory and random alcohol and drug testing for employees holding safety sensitive positions.

Research from around the world has found that workplace accidents, injuries and errors all increase this Monday — so those in less safety sensitive positions such as accounting and finance or IT should also be vigil for mistakes.