The Social Network & Community JUST for Firefighters
Florida Union Opposes Drug Tests And Physical Exams
St. Petersburg Times
When people call 9-1-1 for help, they expect emergency responders to be physically and mentally ready to perform all tasks the call requires. But when it comes to St. Petersburg firefighters, residents may wonder. The fire union opposes Mayor Bill Foster's demand that firefighters submit to random drug tests and yearly physical exams. Those are reasonable requirements that would be in the best interest of firefighters and the public.
The issue is preventing the union and city from reaching accord on a new contract, with only days remaining on the current contract. Foster said firefighters shouldn't fear the drug testing "unless they have something to hide." He wants the physicals done to ensure that firefighters won't "stroke out" during a rescue or while fighting a fire. St. Petersburg police agreed to the both drug testing and physicals.
The city's current fire union contract allows drug testing only when supervisors see signs the employee is under the influence of drugs or alcohol. But those aren't always easy to see. And it is important that firefighter/paramedics, who have access to powerful drugs at work, know they could be tested at any point.
The current union contract also provides for mandatory physicals, but firefighters have found a way to avoid them. They refuse to sign the release of liability that medical providers now require any time they are going to disseminate patient information. City officials say they don't get employees' medical information, just a notice that the firefighter is or isn't fit for duty. But doctors have refused to perform the exams when patients won't sign the form.
And an arbitrator ruled the city can't discipline firefighters who won't sign, thus providing a loophole for those who want to avoid exams.
A union official said firefighters are suspicious the city could obtain medical information to use against them in workers' compensation cases.
The union's concerns can be overcome. They don't trump the need to ensure that firefighters, for their own sake and the public's, are fit for the job. And city firefighters should not be treated differently from police officers.
Related
St. Petersburg firefighters should have drug tests and physicals
Copyright 2010 Times Publishing Company
All Rights Reserved
September 27, 2010
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Fabulous Heather Days of Summer on
-
http://www.usccr.gov/pubs/ada/ch4.htm
Did you read their disclaimer...
"The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government..."
-
Permalink Reply by Mark Oomkes on
-
I'm with Ralph.
This is beyond stupid and makes the union look even more stupid for refusing it.
Lots and lots of employees are required to take random drug tests.
In MI, it is required of firefighters to get regular physicals.
-
Permalink Reply by Jack/dt on
-
As I read it, an addiction to a legally prescribed drug is protected under ADA, however, if that addiction impairs that person to the point of not being able to function at the required level or the impairment is perceived to be a safety hazard then I believe that at the least, that person can be removed from their job to go into rehab. Just because the addiction was legally required doesn't allow that person to work at an impaired level.
-
-
it is just chatter - not fact on that website
-
-
Just chatter? Really? It appeared to me that the site did a good job of both listing the ADA requirements and an explanation.
As I've read through the ADA - http://www.ada.gov/pubs/adastatute08.htm I found nothing that would contradict the "chatter" from the earlier link I referenced. I find it somewhat off-putting that you would so summarily dismiss it. Must just be your nature.
-
-
opinion websites are chatter - you kind of presented it as fact
it was not dismissive of you... it was merely highlighting caution to try to present fact as fact and opinion as opinion - not to disguise opinion as fact or law
-
-
It clearly outlines what the ADA is about, and I did not disguise it as fact or law, simply presented the links and the quotes. It very clearly matches what is on the ADA itself, only with somewhat simplified wording. I could have copy and pasted directly from the ADA act but what I chose said it neatly and more comprehensively.
You really need to lighten up, most of the people don't even bother reading replies longer than a sentence or two and fewer yet bother to click on the links.
-
Permalink Reply by lutan1 on
-
If they have nothing to hide, what's the problem?
Random screening is becoming more and more common in workplace- why should the FD be any different?
-
-
the way the website RE-WROTE the law - changes its meaning
and don't respond to me if you can not handle my opinion
go chatter towards others
-
-
It seems to match up very well with what's on the ADA site . I believe it would take a lawyer to actually make that determination. Are you one of those, too?
As for me responding, it has nothing to do with your opinion, only that I offer mine as well. If you don't like it then I'd suggest you go chatter somewhere else, you know, with the rest of the retired 10 year vollies.
Sheesh, getting a little bitchy here ain't ya? I thought firemen had tougher skin than that. Even the retired ones.
-
Permalink Reply by Vic Silverfish on
-
I think asking for annual physicals is valid, as one's physical condition directly effects your ability to do the job.
That said, I see no valid reason for the city to randomly drug-test its employees. Have a provision for employees that are showing problems, and (of course) anyone involved in an MVA, but as a matter of routine, this is a massive intrusion into your privacy. That we have accepted this as routine just shows how far we've fallen in our expectations.
I'll add to this that I don't do drugs, don't smoke, and rarely drink. For me, all a drug test can do is wreck my life and career with a false positive.
© 2024 Created by Firefighter Nation WebChief.
Powered by
