Kanawha school board OKs random employee drug tests

[Stephanie]

http://www.wvgazette.com/News/200810150841?page=2&build=cache

By Davin White
Staff writer

CHARLESTON, W.Va. - Kanawha County schools will randomly drug test teachers, principals, coaches, school aides and other employees, after school board members voted 4-1 to approve a new policy Wednesday.

After nearly two years of debate over drug tests, board member Jim Crawford and president Becky Jordon reversed their previous votes and decided to allow random testing.

Robin Rector, who agreed with teachers and union representatives against the policy, was the only board member to vote no.

"We're going to pay the price for this if we go forth with this," she said, citing legal battles underway in schools in North Carolina and Hawaii.

The newest policy moves beyond just testing an employee who is suspected of drug abuse, after he is involved in an accident or when he seeks a promotion or transfer.

"We need to find out if it's legitimate," Crawford said.

He has said in recent months that a large majority of county residents he's talked to favor random drug testing. Jordon agrees.

She told teachers in the audience that she appreciates the work they do. Still, she mentioned that executives at Kanawha Valley chemical companies and banks test their employees for drugs.

"Why are you wasting your time complaining?" Jordon said. "You have my child all day long. That's safety-sensitive to me."

The legal term "safety-sensitive" is the crux of the new drug policy. No court with any bearing on West Virginia has ever deemed teachers and several other school employees to be safety-sensitive.

On the other hand, they've never exempted teachers, school board general counsel Jim Withrow has said. Bus drivers, for instance, are already considered safety-sensitive because they drive students each day.

Fred Albert, president of the American Federation of Teachers-Kanawha County, said he was disappointed in Jordon. He said board members should expect a legal challenge.

"I'm not sure what legal avenue we'll take but we'll explore all avenues," Albert said.

Dinah Adkins, president of the Kanawha County Education Association, criticized board member Pete Thaw and others for scrimping over finances when they're willing to foot the bill for drug tests.

Thaw countered by quoting the cost of one company's urinalysis test, at $44. If half the county's 3,200 employees were tested next year, it would cost more than $70,000, he said.


"You can drug test me all day long," Adkins said. "I don't care. You're going to find a lot of vitamins."

Next month, board members will work on the details of how to roll out the policy.

AFT member Rosemary Jenkins worries that a mobile lab, or a drug-testing van, will embarrass teachers who are tested outside schools.

"I just hope they didn't call me out to be tested during my 90 minutes of uninterrupted reading," Adkins said. She referred to that time during the school day where elementary students read without interruption.

Board member Bill Raglin voted with Thaw, Crawford and Jordon in the majority. Superintendent Ron Duerring and school board members can also be randomly drug tested.

[wvsasha]

All this does is grant permission for the people in charge to no longer have to think. That's what zero tolerance policies and "random" testing does - it grants absolution upon those in charge who may have to make a tough judgment call when there are intervening mitigating circumstances. God forbid they actually have to do something to earn their salaries.

While I disagree with random testing and I reallyreallyreally hope I don't have to pee in a cup, if I am told to - I will. Because I can't afford to be fired for refusing but I really wish that my family could afford for me to stand on my principles and refuse and be the first in the county to challenge this. But boy do I feel like a weenie..........

[Stephanie]

Sasha,

I'm so happy to see you! Hope everything else is going well for you.

You know, if they have zero tolerence policies for the students, who by state law are forced to attend these schools, they certainly should have them for the adults working in and running them.

Personally, I favor decriminalizing, or perhaps even legalizing, recreational drug use. That doesn't mean I think teachers should be snorting coke in the faculty lounge or that students should be toking up before school begins. I just don't believe the government has any business telling us what we can and cannot put in our bodies, the war on drugs is a failure of catastrophic proportions, and we shouldn't be treating people suffering from addiction as criminals.

We have a number of counties now requiring students submit to drug testing in order to participate in sports and other activities. I am vehemently opposed to this, however, I am not opposed to random testing of school employees. I don't think it's too much to require the people we entrust with the care and education of our children for so many hours a day, from late August to early June, demonstrate they aren't under the influence of mind altering substances.

[TerryRC]

I don't think it's too much to require the people we entrust with the care and education of our children for so many hours a day, from late August to early June, demonstrate they aren't under the influence of mind altering substances.

If only that was what random drug screening actually did...

[Stephanie]

It's better than nothing. Of course it isn't perfect.

However, this is necessary because the AFT and NEA have made this necessary. Historically, they will protect any teacher no matter how outrageous, even dangerous, the behavior. They will fight any disciplinary action, every attempt at dismissal.

If the unions would work with adminstrators, school boards, and parents, this would not be necessary. They won't and so it is. The unions brought this upon their members by worrying more about setting precedent than the safety of students. When taken with the fact that many teachers support drug testing of students, I don't see how they could expect any other outcome.

[TerryRC]

It's better than nothing. Of course it isn't perfect.

Really? It is better than nothing?

It is an invasion of privacy. The teachers aren't driving the kids. The teachers are not in sole custody of the kids as there are dozens of other adults within a quick hail.

Also, where is your data to back your assertion than "many" teachers support the drug testing of students?

Smoking a joint on your summer break could get you fired. Ridiculous.

You are all about liberty until someone starts screaming, "For the sake of the kids...". This country has lost more freedoms that way...

[Stephanie]

It's better than nothing. Of course it isn't perfect.

Really? It is better than nothing?

It is an invasion of privacy. The teachers aren't driving the kids. The teachers are not in sole custody of the kids as there are dozens of other adults within a quick hail.

Also, where is your data to back your assertion than "many" teachers support the drug testing of students?

Smoking a joint on your summer break could get you fired. Ridiculous.

You are all about liberty until someone starts screaming, "For the sake of the kids...". This country has lost more freedoms that way...

Yes, Terry, it is better than nothing.

The state requires children between the ages of 6 and 16 attend school. There are very few options available to parents. Don't send your kids to school, lose your kids and/or go to jail. That is the reality for the majority of parents these days.

Parents don't have any say over who is teaching their children. They have extremely little control over what material is being presented to them. By law they are required to place their youngsters in the hands of total strangers. Some classes use dangerous chemicals, sharp implements and power tools.

There may be oodles of adults around, but that doesn't protect children from being beaten, bulllied, even raped in public school. In case you don't read the papers, these things go on here in WV too.

My experience has been that a majority of school teachers, and an large majority of school administrators favor testing students for drugs. I have been involved with public schools for over 20 years as a parent, volunteer, and school board member. I've had lots of exposure to teachers and administrators.

Finally, schools and school teachers are typically considered in loco parentis. If you want to smoke a joint in July, pick another profession.

[TerryRC]

My experience has been that a majority of school teachers, and an large majority of school administrators favor testing students for drugs. I have been involved with public schools for over 20 years as a parent, volunteer, and school board member. I've had lots of exposure to teachers and administrators.

And I was a sub back in NY and am the parent of two kids in the Kanawha county system. Big deal. Neither of us an expert to make such statements.

That doesn't stop you from falling prey to the fallacy of bare assertion.

I'm sometimes guilty of it also.


Finally, schools and school teachers are typically considered in loco parentis. If you want to smoke a joint in July, pick another profession.

So what? Are you implying that parents shouldn't use recreational drugs? Put that beer down, Steph.

Would you feel the same way about a pharmacist that refused to sell birth-control pills because of his religion? Shouldn't he pick another profession, also?

You will defend his rights (as you have) but not those of the teacher. Why? For "the sake of the kids".

Do I have to point out your prejudices?

[Stephanie]

My experience has been that a majority of school teachers, and an large majority of school administrators favor testing students for drugs. I have been involved with public schools for over 20 years as a parent, volunteer, and school board member. I've had lots of exposure to teachers and administrators.

And I was a sub back in NY and am the parent of two kids in the Kanawha county system. Big deal. Neither of us an expert to make such statements.

That doesn't stop you from falling prey to the fallacy of bare assertion.

I'm sometimes guilty of it also.


Finally, schools and school teachers are typically considered in loco parentis. If you want to smoke a joint in July, pick another profession.

So what? Are you implying that parents shouldn't use recreational drugs? Put that beer down, Steph.

Would you feel the same way about a pharmacist that refused to sell birth-control pills because of his religion? Shouldn't he pick another profession, also?

You will defend his rights (as you have) but not those of the teacher. Why? For "the sake of the kids".

Do I have to point out your prejudices?

I don't drink beer. When I drink (I should more often) I typically drink Captain Morgan or Pyrat rum. Vodka is pretty darn good too!

Smoking marijuana has been illegal in this country since before anybody teaching in a public school was born. Now, I don't agree with the criminalization of marijuana, or other recreational drugs. However, that doesn't mean I don't obey the law or that I condone the recreational use of drugs.

The "morning after pill" wasn't legal in the USA until very recently. Most practicing pharmacists obtained their licenses before that drug was on the market. They shouldn't be required to give up their profession because the FDA changed the rules in the middle of their career.

A teacher who smokes a joint on Saturday night is breaking the law. A pharmacist who won't fill an rx to induce an abortion because of his or her beliefs about abortion is inconveniencing someone.

[TerryRC]

The "morning after pill" wasn't legal in the USA until very recently. Most practicing pharmacists obtained their licenses before that drug was on the market. They shouldn't be required to give up their profession because the FDA changed the rules in the middle of their career.

Read what I wrote: "birth-control pills".

My mom can remember pharmacists refusing to sell those to her as a young, married woman.

There were doctors that refused to do epidurals because "god wanted women to give birth in pain for the sins of Eve".

Shouldn't they find "other professions", even if they are following the letter of the law (which may not even be within the letter of the law in some places).

By the way, in many places, and I would have to check the laws in WV, smoking pot is no more illegal than speeding.

Should people that drive too fast be eliminated from teaching positions, also?

Your arguments are not compelling.

[Stephanie]

When have I ever defended pharmacists who refuse to dispense birth control pills? I have not, I have defended pharmacists who refuse to dispense abortions in a pill.

No offense intended toward your mother, but I've met you. Your mother would have been a young married woman right around the time birth control pills became on the market. You're going back 40 years.

We're not talking about sixty year old doctors from 40 years ago. We're talking about teachers working with children today.

Marijuana use is illegal. If you want to be a school teacher don't smoke dope. If you want to smoke grass, don't be a school teacher.

[TerryRC]

Marijuana use is illegal. If you want to be a school teacher don't smoke dope. If you want to smoke grass, don't be a school teacher.

Not everywhere. In this state it isn't even a misdemeanor. It is a civil violation, like jaywalking. Oh. My. God. Jaywalkers teaching our kids! The outrage!

Like I said, Steph. You rave about rights except when it comes to teachers. It displays your prejudices.

We're not talking about sixty year old doctors from 40 years ago. We're talking about teachers working with children today.

And the school system is changing the rules, today.

When have I ever defended pharmacists who refuse to dispense birth control pills? I have not, I have defended pharmacists who refuse to dispense abortions in a pill.

In for a penny, in for a pound. Catholic pharmacists believe that using birth-control pills is a sin. So they shouldn't have the right to refuse to fill a scrib but the fundie should?

Your stance is not compelling. It is, in fact hypocritical.

Go ahead and defend the county. Snub the privacy rights of teachers. Just don't carry on about rights and beliefs as you don't apply them universally.

How about this person? Should they find a different line of work if they don't like what they have to do on their job?:

Woman quits job at call center over anti-Obama script (linky clicky)

[SamCogar]

GOOD GRIEF, ….. Terry, the only reason you are defending “spaced out” Teachers on drugs that are in charge of, supervising, teaching children …….. is because you see absolutely no problem with you yourself interacting with your own children.

[Stephanie]

Sam, I assure you, Terry is not a "spaced out" druggie.

As far as privacy rights are concerned, if you want absolute privacy, don't go into a profession where you're going to be in a position of authority over other people, especially children and the elderly. Don't go into a profession where you're responsible for the safety and welfare of others, like an airline pilot or a truck driver.

There are lots of professions to choose from.

Barack Obama has worked closely with domestic terrorist Bill Ayers [airs], whose organization bombed the US Capitol, the Pentagon, a judge's home, and killed Americans.

Yes, she should take a leave of absence of find another job if she doesn't want to read that script. It's the truth. Ayers was involved with the Weather Underground and they did use bombs and they did kill Americans. If Obama doesn't want to be linked to these activities, I strongly urge him to stop associating himself with known terrorists.

You know, Terry, I have been pro-life all of my life. I have donated money, materials, and labor to pro-life groups. I have attended pro-life rallies and protests, including outside the Planned Parenthood where my friend works. I do not associate with people who call themselves pro-life and bomb abortion clinics or shoot abortionists. I condemn those people, I don't fraternize with them.

[Aaron]

I read about the young woman in Weston. The company was paid to do a job and they did it. They didn't force her to do it. They told her to either do it or go home, without pay. She chose to go home. It wasn't until the next day that she decided to quit her job. That was her choice.

As for the drug testing, I agree with Stephanie. If Adminstrators and board members are going to push for kids to be tested, then they should expect that same treatment.

Why is it that there are those, as Mike has pointed out on another thread, who have a problem with equal treatment?

[wvsasha]

Because as educators we are not competing with each other for our pay checks, scholarships, class ranking, etc.

Students who compete for these things should be assured that all are playing on a level field as far as performance-enhancing drugs are concerned.

[Stephanie]

Sasha,

I think you and I have had enough off list conversations for me to believe you know I like you and respect you.

However, while you and your colleagues are not competing for scholarships or class rank, teachers do have our children, and their futures, in their hands. You tell me you don't think that's at least as important as trying out for a hs ball team?

[wvsasha]

Sasha,

I think you and I have had enough off list conversations for me to believe you know I like you and respect you.

However, while you and your colleagues are not competing for scholarships or class rank, teachers do have our children, and their futures, in their hands. You tell me you don't think that's at least as important as trying out for a hs ball team?

I understand what you are saying - and believe me - if I felt that any of my daughter's teachers were under any improper influence-ing medication I would be the first to insist on proper procedures being followed for any and all discipline for said teacher. However, since I know those procedures already exist, I don't feel the need to insist on extra, witch-hunting-making-possible policies being added to the arsenal of administrators who feel the need to exercise their political muscles.

I feel like this will give building level administrators the excuse to be lazy and less-diligent in their monitoring of personnel behaviors since they'll be able to just sit back and let the "random pee test machine" do their dirty work for them.

[Stephanie]

How well do you think those procedures worked with the principal who was found with cocaine in his pocket?

[wvsasha]

How well do you think those procedures worked with the principal who was found with cocaine in his pocket?

oooh....do we need to go there? I know that principal - in his professional capacity - and I was astounded at that whole mess. I was also astounded that he ended up scott-free while a teacher friend of mine ended up with an 18 month suspended teaching license for possession of two joints of marijuana. While neither were on school time or property - and noone was accusing either of being under the influence during school time - I found the disparity between punishments a bit much to take.

So - i guess to answer your question - not very well. But that's more the fault of those in charge of implementing than the spirit of those policies.

[Stephanie]

So - i guess to answer your question - not very well. But that's more the fault of those in charge of implementing than the spirit of those policies.

They just fail miserably so much of the time. Several years ago a Westerly, RI school teacher was pulled over for running a stop sign on her way to school. The officer said he could smell a strong odor of marijuana when he pulled her over, so he asked permission to search her vehicle. He found a roach in the ashtray and a small bag of pot and she was arrested.

This woman claimed it wasn't hers. She said she was driving her husband's truck and it was his. He went to court and testified it was his and although she obviously was going to bring this onto the high school campus, she ended up keeping her job. She was suspended with pay for a while, but a judge let her slide based on her husband's testimony and because of the powerful teacher tenure law in that state coupled with the resources AFT brought to the table, she was back to teaching pdq.

These stories go on all the time. It isn't limited to WV and there are teachers using substances before, during and after school. If the policies which already exist were effective, this wouldn't be an issue. The fact of the matter is, they are not.

[ziggy]

So what is wrong there, Stephanie?

Should she be punished for hubby's habits? If so, why?

[Stephanie]

So what is wrong there, Stephanie?

Should she be punished for hubby's habits? If so, why?

She should be punished for bringing the stuff on campus. She should be punished for smoking grass on the way to her job as a teacher.

Or, are you implying the cop lied when he said both the vehicle and the teacher reeked of pot?

[ziggy]

So what is wrong there, Stephanie?

Should she be punished for hubby's habits? If so, why?

She should be punished for bringing the stuff on campus. She should be punished for smoking grass on the way to her job as a teacher.

Or, are you implying the cop lied when he said both the vehicle and the teacher reeked of pot?

She didn't make it to campus. She was stopped for running a stop sign. Was she cited for that?

If my spouse were a lush (she isn't) and had spilled liquor all over the interior of the car, and I drove it somewhere, would that be evidence that I was inbibing that day? Of course not. But I still might "reek" of liquor.

Give her a test for impairment- just like with alcohol. And if there isn't one, then by god invent one! We can send people to the moon but we can't invent a test for marijuana impairmet? Bull!

But this crap of impairment by implication don't fly with me.

By the way, I have never imbibed illegal substances, and I don't hang out with people who do. So I have no personal axe to grind here. It is just a matter of evidence of impairment and illegal use. And in this case it just ain't there!

[Stephanie]

Running a stop sign combined with the strong smell of marijuana isn't an indication of impairment?

You're funny.

[Sponsored content]