1

Reasonable Suspicion Training for Supervisors Helping Managers Fight Workplace Substance .BLE SUSA USDOT POR.

Susa USDOT FOR iiiéii USDOT Compliance Service 60113th Street NW Suite 900, Washington D.C. 20005 il iii Quest Diagnostics*.

Question 01 Documenting incidents that support a request for a reasonable suspicion drug test is important because organizational or legal challenges, if they arise, will require that you demonstrated a credible basis for requesting a test. SUSA USDOT ' POR SU?€+.

Answer Reasonable suspicion testing for substance abuse in the workplace has been upheld by the courts, but it is still necessary to have appropriate documentation that supports the request for the test. Additionally, the employee will be strongly inclined to argue against the facts as the supervisor recalls them, if the supervisor does not have proper documentation. True.

*Slurred unclear Speech* k.viki Question 02 The following is an example of useful and correctly written documentation: "Tom S. arrived twenty minutes late to work today and was witnessed, by several employees, damaging another vehicle while trying to park his car. He was heard yelling obscenities from within car. When I met with him immediately after the incident, I could smell alcohol on his breath.".

Answer This is an example of documentation that is specific and clear. There are no subjective or opinionated comments or conclusions about the employee's condition. It is written in a factual, unemotional way, with attention to that which can be sensed- in this case, what can be seen, heard, and smelled..

Question 03 The following is an example of inadequate documentation that would be inadmissible in a disciplinary proceeding, or for use to support a request that the employee submits to a reasonable suspicion drug test: "Tom Smith arrived at work late with reports by others of being drunk. He scraped a car in the parking lot and when confronted by me- after the incident- became defensive and immature like a person who had something to hide. He denied he was drunk but admitted he had been drinking before midnight."..

Answer This documentation lacks specific details and instead appears to be conjecture; it would be difficult to defend. It would not support a disciplinary action or a reasonable suspicion drug test..