Reasonable Suspicion Training for Supervisors

[Audio] Reasonable Suspicion Training for Supervisors ,, Helping Managers Fight Workplace Substance.

[Audio] Question: 1. 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. True False.

[Audio] Answer: 1: TRUE 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. Study Guide: Documentation is crucial in demonstrating a credible basis for making a reasonable suspicion testing request. Reasonable suspicion testing for substance abuse in the workplace has been upheld by the courts; however, it is still necessary to have appropriate documentation that supports the request for the test. Additionally, if the supervisor does not have proper documentation, the employee will be strongly inclined to argue against the facts as the supervisor recalls them. Documenting incidents that support a request for a reasonable suspicion drug test is also important because organizational or legal challenges may arise and will require that you demonstrated a credible basis for requesting a test..

[Audio] Question: 2. 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." True False.

[Audio] Answer: 2: TRUE 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. Study Guide: Written documentation must be factual, unemotional, and give attention to that which can be sensed, in other words, that which can be seen, heard, and smelled. Written documentation should not be subjective, contain opinionated comments, or reach conclusions about the employee's condition. 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.".

[Audio] Question: 3. 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 submit 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." True False.

[Audio] Answer: 3: TRUE 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. Study Guide: Inadequate documentation would be inadmissible in a disciplinary proceeding and would not be used to support a request that the employee submit to a reasonable suspicion drug test. Written documentation must be factual, unemotional, and give attention to that which can be sensed, in other words, that which can be seen, heard, and smelled. Written documentation should not be subjective, contain opinionated comments, or reach conclusions about the employee's condition. Insufficient documentation lacks specific details and instead appears to be speculation. It would be difficult to defend. It would not support a disciplinary action or a reasonable suspicion drug test. The following is an example of incorrectly written documentation and would not be useful: " 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.".