Cost of workplace drug testing
An MBA candidate e-mails OHS, Inc. and asks us some pointed questions about workplace drug testing:
■”Why is it necessary for employers to test for the illegal use of drugs?”
■”How much does employee drug testing cost a company today?”
■”How easy is it to cheat a drug test?”
■”Is there a cost/benefit payback to a company that drug tests employees?”
(Read our answers to these and other questions directly below!)
—–Original Message—–
From: Adam (last name and e-mail address deleted by OHS to protect privacy)
Sent: Saturday, March 27, 2004 9:11 AM
To: Ed Poole
Subject: Corporate Drug Testing
Ed-
My name is Adam (last name deleted by OHS to protect this individual’s privacy) and I am currently enrolled in the (university name deleted by OHS to protect privacy) MBA program. I am doing a persuasive presentation on why it is necessary for corporations to test for the illegal use of drugs. I was hoping that you would be able to answer a few of my questions:
Adam- Why is it necessary for corporations today to test for the illegal use of drugs?
OHSsm-There are three facts about illegal drugs that lead up to at least one very good reason, Adam:
(1) Today, just ‘one’ country – a country with only ‘five’ percent (5%) of the entire world’s population – buys
and consumes fully sixty percent (60%) of the entire world’s supply of illicit drugs.
(2) That ‘one’ country is our United States.
(3) In the United States, 77% of all illicit drug users are EMPLOYED!
Adam- Can you give me a rough estimate of how much it costs to test one applicant
OHSsm- OHS, Inc. is a national company with drug testing clients in all 50 states and we charge from a low of $30 per drug test to a high of $55. The “volume” of testing done by the client annually is the primary variable which applies. As with my competitors, a substantially lower per-test price is offered to a company doing 5,000 to10,000 or more tests annually than to a company doing only 500-1,000 drug tests…or only 5-10 tests each year. Our cost for “specimen collection” at the clinic we must use nearby the client’s location(s) also impacts the price (up or down) we ultimately charge. Those costs (the specimen collection, alone) vary around the country from as little as $8 to as much as $35, although the national average is likely about $12.
Today, I estimate that average price per drug test nationally overall (large corporations and medium-sized to very small businesses included) is about $44 per test. That includes cost of collection and lab analysis, but not necessarily the cost of optional Medical Review Officer (MRO) services which usually add about another $2-$3 per test. MRO services are required by federal law of companies testing employees regulated by the U.S. Department of Transportation (big rig truck drivers, airline pilots, oil/gas/pipeline workers, and so forth). Using an MRO is also required by state law in at least nine states of all companies – including those that are not DOT regulated – if they drug test their employees. The important role of the MRO in the drug testing process is explained on this page of our website:
http://www.ohsinc.com/Medical_Review_Officer_MRO_occupational_health_specialist_OHS.htm
Adam- I know that there are different types of tests (blood, urine, hair), which is most effective and what is the cost difference amongst them
OHSsm-For the most part, forget blood. Blood is tested for illicit drugs only in extreme or unique cases (e.g., the tested individual is unconscious, due to an accident) and in some Court-ordered cases. During 2008, an estimated 55 million drug tests were performed n the United States on job applicants, existing employees who were randomly tested, employees who had or caused a workplace accident or injury, certain federal and state prisoners, certain parolees, recovering addicts, moms or dads who were drug tested by court-order as a result of child custody cases, et al. More than 90% of those 55 million drug tests were performed using urine specimens, not blood.
As mentioned above, urine test cost probably averages $44 nationally. Hair specimen testing is about $105-$125 per test nationally. Hair can indicate drug-use (can be “effective”) as far back as 90 days. Most drugs are detectable in urine for only 1-4 days; exceptions are marijuana and less-so, PCP. “Greater accuracy” is not an issue with either hair or urine specimen analysis, though a few detractors will disagree. Hair advocates claim that “more” positives are discovered through hair testing. I would agree in largest part because hair results can go back further than the 1-4 days available through urine testing. In any case, the most effective testing program is “random” testing (the immediate testing of an individual with zero advance notice given) testing throughout the entire year. The “fear of getting caught” is by far the very best deterrent!
Adam- How easy is it to cheat on a test (drink something) that will allow an applicant to pass even though they recently took drugs
OHSsm-The companies that sell the stuff that claim to help you cheat also claim 100% success. I highly doubt it.
Laboratories disagree too, countering that advances in lab analysis have enabled them to detect most if not all such attempts.
Further, most of these products that are ingested as an attempt to cheat require measured consumption at numerous intervals of time over a 24-48 hour period prior to providing the urine specimen for testing. Therefore, “random” (zero notice given) testing greatly hinders if not virtually eliminates any cheating success through “drinking something”. Whatever is consumed has zero time to then cause any demonstrable change in an individual’s system/urine, and therefore will not “change” the results of a drug test.
Adam- Are there studies that display the percentage decrease in worker output if they are on drugs
OHSsm-There are have been many such studies, from different sources including government agencies, university studies, and non-profit organizations. All of them independently come up with quite similar findings of workplace drug-users being “35%” or “33%” or “30%” less productive…also resulting in poorer quality production of company’s products or services, and greater frequency of accidents, more injuries, plus damaged-lost-stolen company equipment and supplies.
It is especially tragic that druggies at work who steal from their company also tend to steal from their fellow employees- their co-workers. Why? They steal to help “supplement” the cost of their drugs not offset by their employer’s wages. They also tend to “recruit” other employees and try to “deal” drugs to them at a profit for that same reason.
Druggies will always deny at least some of the foregoing, claiming that they actually can work better, longer, and are “sharper” at work due to their workplace drug-use. They’re wrong of course, and simply in denial. Mind-altering drugs (legitimately prescribed or illicit) are called “mind-altering” for very good reason.
Adam- I basically want to provide a cost/benefit analysis on drug testing and provide a payback. If you can get back to me at your convenience I would really appreciate it. Again thanks for your help. Adam
OHSsm-Fine, it’s a great and enlightening exercise. As our example, let’s use a company with 100 employees. (You can later project this up or down to a company with only “10″ employees or with 1,000, 10,000, or 100,000 employees.)
Using 100 employees as the number in our sample company, assume a 30% annual attrition rate (resigned/fired/new hires added). Assume an “average” cost of $44 per each pre-employment drug test and per each random drug test (industry standard is to always test “randomly” each year at a test “rate” of 50% of the total number of employees). The same $44 cost per tests would apply to each “reasonable suspicion” and “post-accident drug test, too.
Given the above example, there will be a total of 80 pre-employment and random tests (30+50) performed for the company annually. Then assume another 10 drug tests annually are ordered as “post-accident” and another 10 tests are ordered each year due to “reasonable suspicion”. (Or, shuffle those numbers back or forth. The point is, “assume” another 20 drug tests annually combined, either for that first reason or that second one).
So, to incorporate a solid and very highly effective, year-around Drug-Free Workplace program, we are now at “100″ total drug tests done annually for the typical company with 100 employees. At $44 per test, that means the company is investing $4,400 per year in what would be – I assure you – a very highly effective Drug-Free Workplace program.
Let me define what I mean by, “very highly effective”.
In the first 3-4 months of newly-instituted random drug testing of their employees, every company can normally anticipate (i.e., “expect”) drug “positive” rates of at least 4-5% to as high as 22%. That’s initially.
If it is a “construction” company, it would not at all be unusual that the early positive rate will be as high as 18%-26% of all existing employees who get tested. And, if it is a “restaurant”, they could anticipate a positive rate perhaps as high as 12-16%. These two industries (construction and food services) rank as number one and number two in overall workplace drug abuse. That is per actual stats determined by national labs which do millions of drug tests annually. On the other hand, when testing employees at a secretarial service word-processing firm or a department store, the anticipated “initial” positive rate might be as low as 4-6%.
When I assert that the Drug-Free Workplace program as in the above scenario of a company of 100 (or “10″, or 1,000 or 10,000) will result in a “very highly effective” Drug-Free Workplace, I mean exactly this:
By the end of the first full year – at latest – the rate of drug “positives” coming back on the lab reports will drop by 50% to as much as 80%. Drug positive rates of 26% will drop to as little as 5% and positive rates of 5% will drop to as low as 1%. That’s “first year” improvement. Further, such dramatic improvement will certainly be at the very least “maintained” – if not bettered – in year two and subsequent years as long as the a drug testing program such as I described above remains steadfastly in place throughout the year. That means maintaining pre-employment AND random AND reasonable suspicion AND post-accident drug testing all year around!
So…what happens to those employees caught “positive”? They get fired and go to work at some other company that does NOT drug test. What about new employees replacing them?
Well, most individuals who “do” drugs don’t even apply for an opening at a company that advertises in the local paper’s Help Wanted section as a “Drug-Free Workplace”!
Given the chance for a job at a company that does NOT drug test its employees, druggies will almost always apply there instead!
Exceptions to that practice include drug-users who go “off” drugs for a few days before job interviewing, trying to get their system clean before taking a “pre-employment” drug test. And these “exceptions” (drug-users that pass a pre-employment drug test) are one of the primary reasons that “random” testing and “reasonable suspicion” testing and “post-accident” testing are all absolutely essential elements in developing and maintaining a very highly effective Drug-Free Workplace.)
Soon, the company that once had 100 employees that included a half-dozen to two dozen people who “did” drugs in the workplace and perhaps even “dealt” drugs in the workplace becomes a “Drug-Free Workplace”. The result? Company production increases and quality of products and services improve…sick days are fewer, injuries decrease, the number of Workers’ Comp claims get reduced, the company’s Workers’ Comp and health insurance premiums stabilize, company equipment and supplies stop being damaged or disappearing as frequently.
There’s even more reward than that. A sometimes not considered wonderful additional benefit to the now Drug-Free Workplace Company comes with all of this, too: overall employee morale improves dramatically.
Why? Because, those employees who do not do drugs usually know “which” employees do. Most people do not want to be “squealers”, so they usually do not turn fellow employees in to the boss. A Drug-Free Workplace Program does it for them!
Adam, is the above persuasive enough for your MBA presentation?
I do hope the above information will help you. If it gets you your MBA, then please have them send me one, too.
My very best wishes to you for great success with your presentation!
Ed Poole
Wishing you good health and personal safety always,
Edward W. Poole edpoole@ohsinc.com
President/COO
OHS Health & Safety Services, Inc. http://www.OHSinc.com
d.b.a., Health-Tests DIRECT) http://www.healthtestsdirect.com
3303 Harbor Boulevard, Suite G-2
Costa Mesa, California 92626 USA
949.764.9301 ext. 205 1.800.456.4.OHS (647)
Fax: 949.764.9306
