Andrew Tobin - Partner
In a decision released on 25 August 2008 the Australian Industrial Relations Commission determined that an employer should – subject to certain conditions – employ an oral fluid method of testing their employees for drugs and alcohol, rather than urine sampling, on the basis that the former was more reasonable as less invasive.
Three days earlier, a full bench of the Commission determined that another employer was entitled to stand down workers who refused to submit to urine based testing.
The decisions highlight the increasing prevalence of drug and alcohol testing in the workplace on health and safety grounds, and the later decision acknowledges recent advances in testing technology.
Shell Refining (Australia) Pty Ltd, Clyde Refinery v. CFMEU
Shell planned upon changing their safety policies relating to testing for drugs and alcohol at its Clyde Refinery and Gore...
Error Your web browser is not set to accept Cookies You must have cookies enabled to access our articles on Mondaq.Com. Your Login Details have been provided correctly but can not be passed to our content module. If you are happy to proceed and have enabled cookies, Below is some information about what cookies are and why they are used. What does a cookie do? Why do I have to have them enabled? Can cookies read other information stored on my computer? |
Specific Questions relating to this article should be addressed directly to the author.
| Do you have a question for the author? |



