School District Plan Would Require Pre-Job Drug Test

All applicants wanting to be police officers, bus drivers or bus mechanics for the San Diego Unified School District would be required to take pre-employment drug tests under a proposal presented Tuesday to the Board of Education.

The move, if adopted as expected by the board next week, would affect about 300 people a year who apply for those positions, which were identified as “sensitive” by a committee of district officials.

Board member Jim Roache, who is commander County Jail downtown, praised the proposal and suggested that applicants for any position, including that of a teacher, also undergo drug testing and test negative as a condition of employment.

Roache said that a bus driver may put students in an immediate physical danger if performance is affected by drugs, but added that teachers have significantly more influence on students over the long run if they are under the influence of illegal substances.

However, district personnel director Bill Hoover said the proposed policy is dictated in large part by financial concerns. Testing of applicants for safety-related positions will cost about $9,600 a year, whereas districtwide testing for all positions would run considerably more, Hoover said.

District Superintendent Tom Payzant also cautioned that legal issues surrounding testing, both pre- and post-employment, are not clear-cut.

“There is some confusion over what is (covered by the term) sensitive,” Payzant said. Board counsel Tina Dyer said that a narrow definition limiting the term to “public safety” positions has stronger legal standing at present.

The proposal calls for all applicants to agree to a urinalysis before receiving an employment offer. Should the employee test positive for either drugs or alcohol, a second test using gas chromotography--said to be a highly accurate method of confirmation--will be given. A second positive result, in combination with the applicant’s inability to offer a satisfactory explanation, will result in termination of the employment process.

Hoover said that simply the knowledge of such drug tests being given by the district will result in chronic abusers screening themselves out by not applying for jobs.

“And those who do apply will be screened out with a positive test before becoming employees and attaining property rights to the job,” Hoover said.

Hoover said that the committee also looked at the question of testing current employees for drugs when there is adequate suspicion about their behavior. But that question requires more study, he said, because of legal questions and the need to bargain with various labor unions to include a testing provision in contracts.