Drug testing for DZ Instructors/TMs/Pilots

[WFFC 1]

Quote

Drug testing is an invasion of privacy.

Agreed, but employers have the right to know if their employess have issues with substances that have been listed as illegal.
A local desktop publishing software maker here in Denver was going to implement a drug testing policy. They determined that there would lose more than half of the development staff and thus did not implement the policy. Keep in mind that none of these people has other people's lives entrusted to them.

[jceman 1]

Quote

Quote

Drug testing is an invasion of privacy.

Agreed, but employers have the right to know if their employess have issues with substances that have been listed as illegal.

Why?

If no one else's safety is being compromised, what business does any company have knowing anything about anything their employees do when not at work?

That attitude smacks of Big Brother and I am extremely disappointed at anyone who champions it.

Faster horses, younger women, older whiskey, more money.

Why do they call it "Tourist Season" if we can't shoot them?

[WFFC 1]

Quote

Why?

If no one else's safety is being compromised, what business does any company have knowing anything about anything their employees do when not at work?

Just random thoughts but try these:
1. more sick time
2. degraded performance (alcohol issues too)

I can't think of others right now, but this should get it started. Companies base a lot of their data on stats. If it's determined that the non substance abuser has an average of 3.2 sick days per year, and the average substance abuser has 3.9, that's an additional expense to the company that they may not want bear.
If you haven't had the chance to watch the movie Gattica (sp?).

[jceman 1]

Quote

Quote

Why?

If no one else's safety is being compromised, what business does any company have knowing anything about anything their employees do when not at work?

Just random thoughts but try these:
1. more sick time
2. degraded performance (alcohol issues too)

I can't think of others right now, but this should get it started. Companies base a lot of their data on stats. If it's determined that the non substance abuser has an average of 3.2 sick days per year, and the average substance abuser has 3.9, that's an additional expense to the company that they may not want bear.
If you haven't had the chance to watch the movie Gattica (sp?).

That is the lamest arguement I have heard yet.

If there is a performance problem, I have no problem with asking someone to take a test as part of a problem identification or rehab. That is a standard condition of employment at many firms.

Blanket drug testing is simply a CYA thing for some companies and a PR effort for others. It offers nothing for the individuals involved, on the contrary it conveys the message that the individual is not to be trusted until he has passed some ordeal.

There are a lot of justifications given for drug screening but I maintain that in the absence of cause it is window dressing, pure and simple and is insulting to the employee or job applicant.

Faster horses, younger women, older whiskey, more money.

Why do they call it "Tourist Season" if we can't shoot them?

[WFFC 1]

Quote

That is the lamest arguement I have heard yet.

Unfortunately, the world is run by stats, so not lame. If in doubt, look at your insurance rates on your vehicle.

[skygirlpc 0]

I just wanted to chime in here with my 2 cents. I think that as a whole, skydivers need to respect the risks more than we are! I would love to see less people coming out to jump hungover, over tired and the such. Are drug tests going to help this? I don't know. But, I'm inclined to say if a dzo feels it is necessary I wouldn't argue.
Danielle

[KenKnight 0]

I'm not sure how this effects a dropzone as I'm not aware of their insurance situation, but many companies in Georgia get a 15% discount on their workers comp insurance by instituting a drug and alcohol training and testing program. As I don't know the employment arrangement at most DZ's or the programs in other states, this may or may not make a difference. I know in my field, construction, workers comp insurance is our 3rd largest expense and 15% off makes a very big difference to our bottom line.

_______________
D28695 PoPs #9237
"Mix ignorance with arrogance at low altitude and the results are almost guaranteed to be spectacular"
— Bruce Landsberg

[Jimbo 0]

Quote

Drug testing is also a crude measuring method that ignores a wide range of fatigue, stress, fitness, nutrition, experience, etc. factors.

So, because we can't test for everything that might contribute to you being an unsafe skydiver we shouldn't bother testing for anything?

-
Jim

"Like" - The modern day comma
Good bye, my friends. You are missed.

[diverdriver 6]

Quote

Quote

Does anyone know why the FAA does not require drug and alcohol testing?

Skydiving, from what I could find, is the only form of aviation in the U.S. that does not have drug testing as a requirement. Chris-is this right?

All part 91 flying (which includes skydiving) is exempt from mandatory drug testing by the FAA (or approved program). So, it is up to the operation individually to set up a program or not.

Edited to spell "flying" coredctly...sheesh.....you'd think by now I'd get THAT one right.

Chris Schindler
www.diverdriver.com
ATP/D-19012
FB #4125

[diverdriver 6]

Quote

There are a lot of justifications given for drug screening but I maintain that in the absence of cause it is window dressing, pure and simple and is insulting to the employee or job applicant.

Absence of cause? Well, as we know in skydiving, "just cause" might be a body or two laying in a field smashed up. A bit late then. And that's what many complained about fatalities that tested positive for drugs. That they were being allowed to jump stoned or hungover from being stoned. Well, how do you tell otherwise? People are pretty sneaky creatures and are able to hide their addictions fairly well if they want until it's too late. Kids do drugs under their parents roof all the time. The parents swear they would know. Reality is they don't know. They really won't know.

Drug testing is not just to catch people using but is also a deterent. It was posted here or one of the other 3 threads that pilots (who have been tested for awhile now) only test positive 1% of the time. Yet, as we know deterence can have a tremendous effect on a populous's actions. It's 1% I believe because there is a program. And taking out that 1% is a good thing to keep "weeding" out the weak ones. It's just one tool of many to try and keep the transportation industry "clean". Won't keep it all out. But it would be worse (and it was worse at one time) than it is now.

Chris Schindler
www.diverdriver.com
ATP/D-19012
FB #4125

[jceman 1]

Quote

Quote

There are a lot of justifications given for drug screening but I maintain that in the absence of cause it is window dressing, pure and simple and is insulting to the employee or job applicant.

Drug testing is not just to catch people using but is also a deterent. It was posted here or one of the other 3 threads that pilots (who have been tested for awhile now) only test positive 1% of the time. Yet, as we know deterence can have a tremendous effect on a populous's actions. It's 1% I believe because there is a program. And taking out that 1% is a good thing to keep "weeding" out the weak ones. It's just one tool of many to try and keep the transportation industry "clean". Won't keep it all out. But it would be worse (and it was worse at one time) than it is now.

Chris, you've apparently missed something. In my first post on this thread, I stated that I was against drug testing except when it came to public safety. (It wasn't in those exact words, but that was my intent.)


I'll not argue with your points regarding pilots or instructors, but it seemed to me that the thread had drifted towards ordinary folks in ordinary jobs. It is in this context that my remarks were made, and I won't back down.

Faster horses, younger women, older whiskey, more money.

Why do they call it "Tourist Season" if we can't shoot them?

[diverdriver 6]

My sincerest apologies......I was still on the whole staff testing thing. Sorry. I thought I had read everything before posting. I'll have to go back now.

[skymedic 0]

Quote

Someone correct me if I am wrong, but I believe in Norway. The supervising organization can randomly test anyone, all the way down to funjumpers. I know that when they have competitions, they can test any competitor at any time.

Lise Aune was telling me about something along these lines at Deland one time. I agree with there testing...except to all fun jumpers. but I believe competitors should be tested. I know when Rook and Olav went to Japan they had to pee in a bottle. why is it our country is one of the few that does not require random testing of it's national's competitors, when so many others do?

I think that if you represent the US you should be a fine upstanding citizen in every way.

Now i know I'll get flamed for this....but I see the effects of drugs on a daily basis at work.

Marc
otherwise known as Mr.Fallinwoman....

[ryoder 1,590]

I had been working as a contractor at TCI for a year w/o ever being asked to take a drug test. Then they offered me a permanent position and when Iaccepted, the first thing they did was to demand
a drug test.

It is a sad commentary on a company when they regard the acceptance of permanent job offer as probable cause that the individual must be on drugs.

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[stylin 1]

Quote

Quote

Drug testing is an invasion of privacy.

Agreed, but employers have the right to know if their employess have issues with substances that have been listed as illegal.
A local desktop publishing software maker here in Denver was going to implement a drug testing policy. They determined that there would lose more than half of the development staff and thus did not implement the policy. Keep in mind that none of these people has other people's lives entrusted to them.

If you did a drug test around here everybody would be fired. Ive even caught people openly admitting, at work, that they smoke dope all the time. There are no rules at this company, except working on weekends and meeting deadlines ofcourse.

[NoShitThereIWas 0]

Skydiving is a self policing sport and I personally would like to see it stay that way. As skydivers we are lucky to have that freedom of being self policing but with that freedom comes responsibility. I have known many skydivers to have addictive personalities and a live on the edge mentality. Most of us are adrenaline junkies to some extent, otherwise why would we skydive? With that said I also know that this sport attracts all kinds of other addictive personalities as well, not to infer that everyone in this sport has one. It is just the nature of the beast.

So being that we are self policing and many of us have addictive personalities how can we keep enough order to maintain our freedom and ultimately our safety?

I don't think fun jumpers should be required to take a drug test to jump. I think if that regulation was set forth our sport would lose many jumpers. However I do think fun jumpers need to be aware of the risks involved with not only being under the influence of any drug while jumping but also the effects of sleep deprivation, injury and/or sickness on one's reaction time. I have seen video of a jumper having a malfunction where a one second delay in his response time would have made the difference between his life or death. I think this message drives my point home.

However, those of us who are in a position of authority and ultimate responsibility (i.e. instructors/pilots/riggers/packers) for the safety of other people's lives are in a separate category. Once you cross over into that category there needs to be a standard of professionalism which must be maintained. Not only do WE set the example to other jumpers but we are ultimately now in the position to be responsible for the lives of others. When I became an instructor, I came to grips with "It is not just about me anymore." Some unsuspecting individual has now placed their life in your hands. USPA, your DZO, peers and the people who bestowed your rating upon you have given you their ultimate confidence in you as a professional and representative of USPA and our sport.

They have put their names and business on the line and trust you to at least show up sober with all of your faculties to jump and be prepared for the unexpected. If any DZ wanted to insure that their instructors/pilots/riggers and packers are drug and alcohol free I support that 100%. If you hold one of the above positions and aren't comfortable with that policy perhaps you should not be in that position.

As an AFF instructor I already know enough can go wrong quickly as it is, why would you want to compound the problem and put yourself or your student in an unsafe position?

My views have become much more stringent after seeing a friend of mine die knowing that the toxicology reports would probably show drugs in his system. People are going to do what they will and I don't think drugs was the only reason this person died. But the situation may have had a different outcome if he was completely sober. Unfortunately we will never know now. After that happened I realized this is no game. It also caused a lot of bad publicity for that particular DZ's reputation as well as skydiving in general.

I hope no one interprets this response as me promoting fun jumpers to be able to jump stoned and drunk because that is not what I am saying. But I also don't think they should be required to take a drug test and should have enough common sense to know the consequences of their actions.

Roy Bacon: "Elvises, light your fires."

Sting: "Be yourself no matter what they say."

[brits17 0]

i agree. case and point: its an attempt to keep skydiving's image totally out of the gutter, considering how most of its unprofessional anyway.

didn't mean for that to sound bad though, because i love the sport and the people, it just puts on a better image to the public.

_______________________
aerialkinetics.com

[cadmium 0]

Drug testing solves nothing! You don't need testing to determine if someone is a safety hazard. Testing should only be used as a conformation in order to take disciplinary action, if even then.
Just my .02. Oh and no I don't use drugs.

Keep the sport and its people free and self-policing.

_________________________________________

On the Journey of Life! Want a Ride?

[nightjumps 1]

I literally sat here for thirty minutes looking at the poll question and voted, "No."

While that may seem 180 degrees to my thread posts (Bladder Cops) to DJan, at no time was I questioning her professionalism, character, or integrity as an Instructor. While I don't know her personally, over the years, I've come to know "of" her and that professionalism.

My challenge to her was in line with her leadership position in the USPA. As an individual, she maintains the highest of professional standards. Safety has always been her creed. As one who holds a leadership position, we must recognize that over the past couple of years, there has been more than one case of an instructor's irresponsibility (Toxicology report indicates enough to "significantly impair judgement) resulting in a student or their own death after teaching that day.

On more than one occasion, I've had to approach an instructor to take a "Time out." Not just for recreational reasons, but knowing how much they had to drink the night before, their spouse or significant other leaving them, death of a loved one, etc.

While I applaud their commitment to do the job, sometimes we're just not 100 percent there mentally. What WE have to do is allow some flexibility to allow folks to "Time out" with them feeling like their contractor relationship with the DZ isn't in jeopardy. I have always assured the person approached that it is a "Time out," chill out, enjoy the day, work with students on the ground (Assisting under observation)... but let's take the day to take some of the pressure off you. It has always been met with gratitude and actually reinforces their loyalty and commitment to the DZ. In fact, its gotten to a point where they feel their S&TA can be approached voluntarily and told, "Keith, I need a mental health day." As such, I respect their level of professionalism even more - rather than chasing a few bucks for the day, they take responsibility for not being 100%. Does it jam up the DZ... Sure, but not as much as having someone who's not all there. The DZ always rallies together to pick up the slack becuase we've all been there.

This mandated drug-testing controversy opens up a much larger can of worms than I'm sure most have thought about.... Now that the drug-testing companies have been approached by a couple of DZ's, they will in-turn get a list of all DZs to approach - its a new market for them and make no mistake, they too are about generating revenue. If a DZ refuses, it will "appear' as though they support the use of recreational acitivities even though none may be present. As a result, that refusal may hit the media limelight, thereby focusing the attention of a broader gorup of people outside our industry. This could eventually lead to our being placed under the microscope by more than one govermental agency including that of the FAA.

Once that happens... It will become forced compliance and for those like DJan and myself who highly regard the "Right to Privacy" and the Freedomn of Choice," we will be forced to make a decision between mandated drug-testing and our individual beliefs in those constitutional rights. We will be judged on the content of our urine; not the character of our professionalism by reputation.

I spent ten years in Special Forces with some time as an SF Instructor at Bragg. I found it very demeaning that the military could trust me with training some of the very best, but felt it necessary to encroach on my constitutional rights to validate by professionalism with a urine sample because "It was a requirement for the whole Army."

The message I received was, there are a few bad ones, so we're going to test everyone in the interest of fairness through random testing so that "they" don't "feel" like we're singling them out.

Mowing the field doesn't get rid of the weeds. It may give the "appearance" of not having any weeds, but they are still there. You must individually root them out. DZO's know who the weeds are. Pluck them by the roots and toss them. DZO's are not in jeopardy of litigation in this area because it is usually a contractor rather than employer/employee relationship and as such in most every state consitutes an "at will" employment by both parties.. DZO's "may" perceive this drug test as an external device to justify getting rid of the bad ones while remaining popular with the group "Why was so & so terminated?" If "so & so" is a popular prerson on the DZ, its easier to say, "Well, they fliunked the drug test."

But, in my opinion that is a lazy way of dealing with the problem. Nobody ever said, "Leadership was easy." Sometimes you have to make hard, firm and unpopular decisions. But, you have to do that at times. Rather than taking the broad brush stroke approach with mandated drug-testing that makes the weeds "feel" like its fair; it is unfair to the majority of professionals, whether its pilots, truckers, soldiers, or instructors.

Drug-testing is a deterence, but a public proclamation of "zero-tolerance" followed by the leadership acting on that policy can be just as effective a deterrent.

So, before we take the broad brush stroke of mandated drug-testing in the interest of fairness. How about we try an industry-wide "zero-tolerance" public policy for the next year or two in the interest of protecting the majority of professionals, rather than acting in the interest of "fairness" for the minority of bad weeds.

First, I challenge the USPA to publish a "zero-tolerance" public proclamation that anyone who engages in illicit activities while a student is in their charge be subjected to the fullest extent of the law and be banned from the USPA for life.

I challenge the DZO’s to NOT implement mandatory drug testing. You have been in the business long enough to know who the true professionals are and those who are not. You are leaders. Act like it. Make the tough albeit unpopular decisions. If you suspect someone needs to be sent packing – Send them packing. Allow only the true professionals to represent your organization. Create and foster an environment that allows you to be approached individually for a "Time out." and respect that person for having the professionalism and courage to come to you for whatever reason without jeopardy. If they come to you on a regular basis, then you need to take them aside and explain that they've had a lot of "Time outs" lately and perhaps they should relinquish their standing as an Instructor until such time that they feel they can work as a contractor on a more regular basis.

I challenge the membership to avoid situations that may negatively affect not only students, but also your fellow skydivers. What you do off the DZ is your business. What you do on the DZ is everyone’s business. If you signed up as a contractor or staff, you have two responsibilities; one is to ensure you are able to work on a regular basis so that DZO can generate revenue to keep the DZ open for all skydivers. Your second responsibility is; If you’ve had too much, an emotional argument with a loved one, death in the family, whatever the circumstance… Walk away for the day. If your DZO is one that holds it against you for communicating responsibility, feel free to act responsibly at another DZ. If your head is not in it one hundred percent, jump another day. If you see someone whose head is not in it one hundred percent, take it up with that person directly first. Chances are, if you see it, they’ll know that others will see it. If ignored, go to your S&TA.

Each and every one of us is responsible for a safe environment and the protection of our rights and freedoms.

I challenge the USPA, the DZO’s and the membership to take that responsibility.

...Bigun

[PhillyKev 0]

Quote

Quote

Drug testing is also a crude measuring method that ignores a wide range of fatigue, stress, fitness, nutrition, experience, etc. factors.

So, because we can't test for everything that might contribute to you being an unsafe skydiver we shouldn't bother testing for anything?

-
Jim

Correct. The judgment about whether or not someone is safe should be made by how they perform in the air. Not by some chemical analysis of their urine.

[PhreeZone 20]

I know of at least one DZ that has a published zero tolerance policy for both jumpers and staff. More then one person has found themselfs tossed off the DZ for breaking the policy. It works quite effectivly since the DZO makes it known that any violation results in a ban from the DZ as either a jumper or a instructor.

Self policing can work, but only if the DZO's are willing to forgo popularity and some money to stand up for the ethics of a sober instructor in working for them. I know of too many DZO's that are willing to look the other way just since they need the staff or can't afford to take an unpopular stance with their jumpers.

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[dgskydive 0]

Perris Valley also does drug testing for there school staff.
Since they get a lot of high profile tandems and aff students, I think it is best choice for them. How bad would it have been if one of the Bush twins had went in on their tandems, and they found drugs in the TM's system. That could have been the end of us all, or at least one of the premier DZ's in the world.

Dom

[diverdriver 6]

Quote

While I applaud their commitment to do the job, sometimes we're just not 100 percent there mentally. What WE have to do is allow some flexibility to allow folks to "Time out" with them feeling like their contractor relationship with the DZ isn't in jeopardy. I have always assured the person approached that it is a "Time out," chill out, enjoy the day, work with students on the ground (Assisting under observation)... but let's take the day to take some of the pressure off you. It has always been met with gratitude and actually reinforces their loyalty and commitment to the DZ.

Well, I seem to have a different view on this. If you asked me to take a "time out" I think I would be pretty pissed at you. I mean, I know what's in my head and whether or not I'm concentrating well or not. If I broke up with my GF yesterday and you automatically assumed I must be distressed I think THAT is much more of an ivasion than drug screening. You have no imperical information to base your "time out" other than you think I've had something stressful happen.

I flew the day after 5 friends were killed in a jump plane crash. I did fine. Did I think about sitting out? Yes. And I determined that I was fine to fly. How dare you think you know more than me about my state of mind.

Now, with that said, this is somewhat sarcastic since I think you are right on about how to deal with people. BUT, I see no difference in what you are doing and drug screening. You are using your eyes, ears, and past experience to enhance safety. Urine testing (NOT BLOOD DRAWING) is not invasive. Otherwise breatholizers would be consdiered invasive too.

I think I'm about up to $5.32 in opinions now.

Chris Schindler
www.diverdriver.com
ATP/D-19012
FB #4125

[Jimbo 0]

Quote

Correct. The judgment about whether or not someone is safe should be made by how they perform in the air. Not by some chemical analysis of their urine.

The problem with that is that everyone performs well enough in the air until they don't. By that time it's too late.

What about a chemical analysis of their breath? I'm sure there's a unit similar to the breathalyzer (commonly used to test for alcohol) for marijuana these days. If there isn't I think it can't be far behind. Should I be allowed on the plane after I've had a six pack? How about an hour after I've smoked? Chances are that the skydive will have gone without incident and I will have performed at an acceptable level. What is an acceptable level?

-
Jim

"Like" - The modern day comma
Good bye, my friends. You are missed.

[nightjumps 1]

Quote

Well, I seem to have a different view on this. If you asked me to take a "time out" I think I would be pretty pissed at you. I mean, I know what's in my head and whether or not I'm concentrating well or not. If I broke up with my GF yesterday and you automatically assumed I must be distressed I think THAT is much more of an ivasion than drug screening. You have no imperical information to base your "time out" other than you think I've had something stressful happen.

I flew the day after 5 friends were killed in a jump plane crash. I did fine. Did I think about sitting out? Yes. And I determined that I was fine to fly. How dare you think you know more than me about my state of mind.

C'mon Chris... this is the same argument that those who engage in recreational actitivties offer. You're using their exact argument.

Here's $4.35 back, you argue better than that.