About the Author J. D. Santucci (a.k.a. "Tuch") began his railroading career in 1978 as a trainman on the Missouri Pacific. After a round of lay-offs in 1985, Tuch embarked on a railroad odyssey, working in many different situations for different roads. This column tries to explain some of the nuts and bolts of the job and also demonstrates what we have to deal with on a regular basis within and without the industry. Tuch currently works through freights out of Chicago for Canadian National/Illinois Central. ©1999, 2003-2007 JD Santucci. Logo ©2002 The Railroad Network. By J.D. Santucci

October 7, 2004
Before we get into today's lesson there is a little stuff to cover first.

Owing to the way I have been working lately, I have not been able to get these diatribes out in a timely manner. Gone are the weekly lessons. So for the present time I will produce them on an as time permits basis. Once again there is too much to do in too little time. I've working numerous twelve hour days again with only one day off per week and am driving an hour or more each way to get to and from work. So I will crank these out as time permits.

I actually have several of them in some state of production right now, but they are not complete. Sometimes I will undertake a topic and write like crazy only to lose my thought or direction as the column unfolds on the screen in front of me. I will then take a hiatus from it and change to a different topic. Eventually I return to the partially completed one(s) and apply the finishing touches. In some cases they get major revisions while in other cases they just get touched up and completed.

This particular column has been in the works in my head for several years. It then began its production into a column over a month ago. Between the lack of time and trying to get my thoughts into the words that will make sense, it has taken this much time to produce the finished product.

To add to the mix of stuff, it is now vacation selection time again. I handle the Engineer vacations for BLET Division 10 in Chicago. This covers all the Engineers on the District 4 seniority list including the two that are not part of the BLET but have opted to belong to the UTU. This year my list has fifty-five Engineers including myself to make picks. So I have to contact each and every Engineer in seniority order to get their requests. We go in order of seniority as this is the most reasonable manner in which to handle it. While this sounds easy, it can be a huge pain in the ass. It usually takes over a month and a half to complete the process. Once this year's selection process is complete, I'll probably do a column on how this all works and the problems I run into each and every year in handling it.

I would like to thank all of you that have dropped me a note to assure that I was still around and not committed to some home for stressed out railroaders, although that might not be such a bad deal. And the beautiful bride says nobody will notice the difference in me anyway.

"You don't have to be crazy to work on the railroad, but it makes the job much easier if you are."

And now for something completely different.

Recently I "won the lottery" as it were and my assignment was required to submit to a random drug test. Each railroad handles the manner in which the random selection works. I will outline two different methods employed by two different railroads and also go over the steps and procedures of the test.

Drug testing has become part of the norm in the rail industry since the latter 1980's. Initially the testing was only used after some sort of episode. The use of it was inconsistent though. The Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and the United Transportation Union which represent the Engineers and Trainmen were opposed to it in part, because of inconsistencies in the method of collecting the specimens and also those of the labs that performed the actual tests on said specimens. Also, there were inconsistencies within the industry itself in how it was determined who would be tested and who wouldn't and what justified the tests.

Several labs that performed the testing were disqualified from performing the tests. Poor handling and procedures as part of the chain of custody (which will be explained later) were not properly adhered to. It was alleged that several employees were given erroneous positive results owing to the poor procedure follow through.

Random drug testing did not come into the picture until 1991. After the fatal episode in Maryland which resulted in some sixteen deaths and dozens injured random drug testing became the law of the land. Congress passed into law an act that required that all safety sensitive employees on the railroad be subjected to random, reasonable cause, probable cause and post accident drug testing. This includes all transportation employees as well as certain other employees. It also allows for the industry to drug test all perspective employees as well. This means the industry can and does test all successful applicants for jobs. They must pass such tests or they are not hired.

You should see how fast a room of perspective employees clears out at a railroad hiring festival when it is announced that all potential candidates for the job must pass these required tests before they can be hired and then are subjected to the four various tests once hired.

Under the law, railroad employees may not use illegal controlled substances at all and may not drink alcohol when subject to call or while on duty. Period. The rules are very clear and concise. They don't care what you want to do on your day off or your vacation. It is against the law to use them and the industry does not tolerate them at all.

Of course, the law is silent about any requirement for the testing of railroad managers. Some railroads, such as CSX require their officials be tested. This requirement carries through to their subsidiary companies as well. We'll get into this more in a bit as well.

As I have mentioned, there were problems with testing in the early days of its use. A couple of labs were using shoddy testing methods, improper handling of the specimens or both. Inconsistencies appeared which caused problems for some employees. It was alleged that several employees were disciplined for false positives. I spoke with one several years ago that was a victim of this poor procedure. The lab had an unmarked specimen but was "certain that it was his." They reported a positive test to his employer and he was disciplined as such. He was eventually reinstated with all lost wages and went on to file a lawsuit against the lab.

The testing itself has been significantly improved over the years. There were complaints of false positives triggered by the use of normal products not associated with the use and abuse or controlled substances. Certain commonly used over the counter cold remedies were triggering false positives. Products such as Contact cold capsules and Vick's Vapo Rub were just two of them. Certain foods were also causing false positives. The poppy seeds found in certain rolls and in cakes were also blamed for triggering such results. There was a detailed list out at one time of other products commonly used that could also trigger a positive test.

Before testing was enhanced and improved, a positive result resulted in automatic discipline to employees that were not actually guilty of any offense. The unions representing employees subject to testing made complaints to Congress and the Federal Railroad Administration about the testing procedures. The issue of chain of custody was also an issue presented and we will also discuss this issue in a bit.

Today, testing is far more thorough. Should a positive result be trigged, more advanced procedures are used to test the sample more in depth. This deeper testing oftentimes tosses out the original positive. They have to test for the specific drugs on the list. So now should there be a positive indicated in the initial test, the in depth tests can and often do exonerate the employee being tested.

The chain of custody is also important. This procedure is to ensure that the specimen produced by the employee goes where it is intended to go and is not altered or tampered with prior to and after it is delivered the party in charge of collecting it nor improperly handled upon its receipt at the lab conducting the tests. As I go through the procedure of the test, I will also outline the chain of custody.

The random selection process is handled differently from railroad to railroad. The random procedure has to be approved by the FRA. Canadian National uses the private contractor they employ to handle the collection of drug tests to make the random selections. This company draws job assignments randomly from the computer. They then contact the railroad to verify that this job is still an active assignment. When it is verified the job indeed still is active, the railroad is then notified that this job has been selected and needs to be tested. There is a window in which the testing must be completed. Once the time passes, this assignment is dropped and another assignment must be drawn.

With this method, an employee could conceivably get tested quite often. I know of one Trainman who was tested twice in three days on a random. He was on the extra board and as luck would have it, drew two different assignments that were on the list to be tested just three days apart. Even though he was tested just a few days previous, he had to be tested again this second time.

In my days at the IHB, the method of selection was quite low tech. The names of all transportation employees were literally placed into a hat. Names were then drawn out by the employee designated to handle this duty and managers notified of the names and time frame window in which to test such employees.

Some roads, like Amtrak remove the employee being random tested from service pending the results of the test. Once the results of a clean test are received from the lab, said employee is returned to service with full pay for all lost time. The reasoning behind this is quite logical; should the employee being tested be "hot" and then gets involved in some sort of episode while awaiting the results of the random test, there could be quite the exposure to litigation. The philosophy is that they would rather pay the lost wages now rather than risk the potential for a much greater payout later.

The results are usually made available to the carrier in about three days.

There are four different types of tests used by the railroad; random, reasonable cause, probable cause and post accident. Random is just that, an employee or job assignment is chosen at random.

Now I know of one road that would suddenly have a spike in random tests should there be a test that came back positive. I know of two employees at this road who told me of being tested every single time a random, reasonable or probable cause test resulted in a positive. Both told of being "random" tested some ten times in one year. That's a lot of randomness.

The reasonable cause test is used after some sort of episode. This would include a derailment or accident that meets or exceeds the threshold for damage in dollars. Some railroads will test for offenses that do not result in high major damage. Running through an improperly lined switch, a train separation owing to improper train handling, running over a derail, getting by or coming into contact with a blue flag, occupying a track segment without authority and failure to stop at a stop signal are just a few examples of reasons for getting tested. This is allowed under the law.

The probable cause test is used when there is a suspicion of impairment. Should an employee be suspected of being under the influence of something, the probable cause test is ordered. In my days in management, I had to undergo training to learn what to watch for and how to watch for it. And in certain circumstances, the employee under suspicion has to be observed by two representatives from the railroad, not just one. The second rep may be an officer from the railroad police that has also undergone the training.

The post accident test is the big kahuna. This test is used only after a major episode. This would include a major wreck with a very high damage amount usually involving a fatality. In addition to the breath and drug test, a blood test is also administered.

Employees are not required to submit to a drug and alcohol test after a collision with a motor vehicle or striking a pedestrian. I repeat; employees are not required to submit to a drug and alcohol test after a collision with a motor vehicle or striking a pedestrian. The local, county or state police investigating such episodes cannot legally request or demand railroad employees involved to submit to any type of drug or alcohol testing. We cannot be arrested by the investigating authority involved for failure to submit either. However, should the railroad officer involved in investigating this episode have reason to believe there is impairment on the part of any of the employees involved could order a probable cause test.

Each test uses a specific set of forms peculiar to that type of test. In the event that the wrong forms are used, the test then becomes null and void. Even if the results are positive for drug or alcohol use, these results are thrown out and cannot be used at all. I have heard of several situations where an employee was dirty but the person administering to the filling out of the forms and collecting the specimen used the wrong forms. Therefore the results were tossed and the employee reinstated.

In on instance I had the person conducting the test give me the wrong form to fill out. While about half way through the process, they realized they had given me the wrong form and we had to start over again.

While this sounds crazy, there has to be a system of checks and balances. These are rules governed by law. The system has to have protection for those subjected to these tests. Otherwise there could easily be an abuse of this system.

Some railroads use private contractors to handle the test collection. There are various companies in the business of performing this service. Such companies are also employed by other industries as well. At two railroads that I have worked for, they used this one particular company for handling their testing. The lady that runs this company was is the friendly and outgoing person. I dubbed here "the Pee Queen." She felt this was more elegant than the original title she was christened with; "The piss girl." Other railroads use their own employees designated as their test people. At Metra there was an employee designated as their drug test collection employee. He had some title but I being that I never had any dealings with him I never did learn what it was. He was affectionately referred to though as "the piss boy." I don't suppose he impresses too many women when he tells them about his job.

So now we'll start the procedure for the random test.

The random test can only be conducted during the tour of duty under the hours of service. It can be conducted any time within your trip but it must be completed before the expiration of your hours of service (HOS). Failure to complete the test within the HOS would constitute an hours of service violation on the part of the carrier. More often than not, they will attempt to get you when you first go on duty, but I have been tested while I was already working having been on duty some eight plus hours.

So now we go on duty. We are notified that our job is being hit for a random test. Each employee is handled individually as opposed to as a group. Each employee will accompany the representative into a room and begin the process. The employee is required to state his name and to present a picture ID as proof of their being who they are supposed to be. We can't just say "This is me."

We are asked to empty our pockets as part of the test. They want to make sure we are not carrying something that might alter the sample.

Some railroads take you to a clinic for the test and they will go as far as putting you in a hospital gown to conduct the test.

We then begin to fill out the required forms. Once the paperwork is completed, we then take the breath test. We have several names for this test, none of which is appropriate to mention here though. The machine is akin to what the police use for testing drivers suspected of being under the influence. Should the test trigger a reading of anything other than 0.0, the machine shuts off for fifteen minutes. After this time out period the machine reactivates and you are required to blow into the tube again. If you blow anything other than the 0.0 again, you are in a heap of trouble.

Federal law allows for a reading of 0.2 but in the US, most railroads have taken a zero tolerance attitude. This means nothing but 0.0 is acceptable. Now in contrast, the airline industry allows for the flight crew to work with a 0.2 reading.

If the test is 0.0 the first time, there is no need for the second test. The machine prints out the results and they are then attached to the forms.

Should the first blow give you a reading of other than 0.0, you are also instructed not to smoke a cigarette while waiting for the second opportunity. Some folks erroneously believe that if you are a little hot, smoking that cancer stick will cover up a positive result. This is totally incorrect. Smoking actually draws more blood into the arteries that feed your lungs. You detoxify a great deal of alcohol through your breath. The alcohol in your blood is dispelled into your lungs and your exhaling casts it from your body. The smoking will draw more blood to your lungs as you are inhaling deeper. This will produce a greater amount of alcohol being passed into your lungs and then out through your breath.

You are then asked to produce a sample of urine. There is a specific minimum amount that must be produced or else what is presented cannot be used. If you cannot go at that moment, you are then allowed to work on it. You get three hours to produce a sample. The time they request the sample is noted on the form and your three hours is from that moment. In the meantime, one of the other members of your crew can begin his test. While waiting you can enjoy a cup of coffee or some water to "encourage" production.

Whenever you can produce you let the representative know. They will ask you to empty your pockets first. You are then presented two kits from which to choose. After picking one, the protective shrink wrap seal is removed and the package is then opened. You are then escorted into the rest room and handed a beaker to fill. It used to be that they dropped some blue dye into toilet first, but they have stopped that practice. They wanted to make certain you were not filling the toilet and then stating you couldn't go, or go enough to provide the minimum amount. They no longer drop the dye.

Unless you are suspected of tampering with your sample, nobody is required or allowed to observe you producing. If it is believed there is a tampering issue, the employee is required to give another sample and is supervised doing so.

There has to be reasonable cause for the accusation of tampering. The temperature of the specimen is tested. There is a minimum and maximum temperature range for the provided specimen. Should it be out of this range tampering could be suspected. The look of it may also be a factor. There was an incident at one railroad where the employee was a strict vegetarian. The result of his eating habits rendered a totally clear sample. It was suspected he tampered with his sample and he was removed from service.

It was later proven that this was a legitimate sample and he was returned to service. I cannot recall if this employee was compensated for the lost time though.

I was told by a doctor many years ago that you should go into the toilet first before filling the beaker. He told me that if there is anything at all in there, it tends to be concentrated at the beginning. Even though I know I am clean, I still follow this doctor's advice. Hey, why tempt fate?

So the beaker is filled and the specimen tested for temperature. This can be accomplished it a couple of ways. Some beakers have a temperature stick attached directly to them and they measure the temperature immediately. Or the employee collecting the sample may use a stick that is dipped into the sample to get a reading. In either event, the temperature reading is recorded onto the form.

If the temperature is too cool, the sample is rejected. It can then be claimed that the sample provided has been altered. Over the years, I have known people that will carry a sample of one of their kid's urine to use. In fact, there are companies that sell items to help you skirt the law and the scope of the test.

The sample in the beaker is then poured into two vials. This is referred to as the "split sample." There is a reason for this. Should there be a positive test that has been further examined; the employee has the right to request a second test using that second sample. Being that this second vial contains a sample of the very same specimen there is little chance of it having been tampered with.

The vials are filled and sealed in the presence of the employee. There are numbered seals placed over the plastic caps that seal the container. The numbers on these seals must match the control number on the form that accompanies the sample. These numbered seals are initialed by the employee being tested. The two vials are placed into a "Ziploc" style plastic bag which is placed into a box. The copy of the form the lab receives is placed with the samples into this box and it is closed. Another seal is placed onto that box.

The employee being tested then gets a copy of the form used in the test. The copy the lab receives does not have any information about the employee being tested. All they receive with reference to the employee is the control number and the initial on the seal. They have no way of knowing the name or any other information about the employee whose sample they are testing.

The railroad copies of the form do contain the pertinent information about the employee as they do need to know.

If the sample is clean, the railroad is notified and all is right with the world. CN used to send us a letter notifying us that were are clean and green and also thanking us for our participation. Like as if we had a choice in the matter.

Now should you test hot, you are immediately removed from service. You may then request the split sample be tested. If you know you are dirty it is pointless to request the split sample be tested. You then get an audience with the substance abuse counselor to be assessed.

If, after your three hour window passes you are not able to provide a specimen, you are medically disqualified from service. You are then sent to the clinic to be examined for any health problems that may preclude you from being able to go in a timely manner. If the medical folks find no health problems, you are considered to be refusing to be tested. This will result in nine months off without pay. Of course there is the fair and impartial investigation that is conducted first.

If you flat out refuse to be tested in the first place, you are removed from service. A fair an impartial investigation will follow and you will be disciplined. I believe this is also a minimum of nine months out of service.

The specimen provided to the lab is tested for metabolized drugs. In my management days there was an employee that tested positive who claimed a lab technician had sprinkled cocaine into his sample just prior to its being tested. He had tested positive for a second time and according to Federal law, was required to be dismissed.

It was explained to him about the testing for metabolized drugs. He still insisted that somebody sprinkled some coke into his sample. It was explained to him that aside from not happening it was not logical. Why would somebody spend their own money on cocaine to tamper with the sample of somebody they don't know? Contrary to what a few people believe, the labs are not under some sort of pressure or quota to find positive results. To the contrary, the industry is hoping for more negative tests.

The sample is also tested for "remedies" that are designed to mask a potential positive result. If your sample tests positive for these, you can and will be disciplined as you have attempted to alter your specimen.

Back in 1989 Rickey Gates, the Engineer on the set of light engines ran a stop signal which triggered a massive fatal collision with an Amtrak train in Maryland. When he tested positive for drugs he proclaimed, "everybody is doing it." As a result of this wreck, the random drug testing program came into law. It was required that the industry test the equivalent of 50% of their employees per year. After several years of testing with a higher level of negatives than was probably expected, provisions in the law reduced the total number of employees to be tested was reduced to the equivalent of 25%. As long as the positive result factor remains under the designated threshold this 25% figure will remain the norm.

These numbers reflect a total number of railroad employees tested, not 50% or 25% of the actual individual employees. Some employees might get tested several times in a year while others might not get tested at all. Let's say there are 5000 employees subject to testing, there would have to have been 2500 tests performed under the 50% rule. This doesn't mean that half of all the actual employees would be tested. If you demanded a true half, this would reduce the randomness. It would also allow for somebody that was tested earlier in that year to not be subject to a random test again for the rest of that year.

I had mentioned earlier about the random testing of management and non-agreement employees. CSX is one road that tests all of these people. This policy applies to their subsidiary companies in the rail industry as well. At one of these companies where they invoked this policy, some thirteen employees tested positive. Several others flat out refused to be tested and left the employ of this company.

When I became a Trainmaster at the IHB, I asked about being subjected to the random testing program. I was informed that I would not be subject to it unless they had to use me as an operating employee in an emergency situation. Well, I was used as an Engineer on several different occasions but, upon checking, was somehow not added to the list of employees subject to testing. I was told to "not worry about it."

After submitting my resignation as a company officer and returning to the ranks, they demanded that I take not only a physical, but also a drug test. I could have made an issue of this but I decided that since they wanted be real a**holes, I'll play their little game. After all, these tests are not cheap and being that they have to pay for them, I would gladly let them get charged for the unnecessary expense. Perhaps this would cause somebody's bonus to be reduced slightly.

Random testing is a necessary evil. I guess it is a double edged sword. I know I don't have to worry about anything as I am clean, but having to take this test is a pain. My biggest personal gripe is this; those that enacted the law (read that our politicians in Washington) should be subjected to the same requirements and submit to the same testing. And all of those that manage this rail industry from CEO down to the lowest assistant something or other should also be subjected to the same rules for testing as well. You might see quite a few changes enacted if this were the case. Their attitude might also change as well.

And so it goes.

Tuch