Re: Rules Compliance
Author: J
Date: 03-05-2009 - 10:46

Alcohol / Drug testing is a complex subject and you can read all about it in the following link:
Quote:
49 CFR 219

[ecfr.gpoaccess.gov]

To summarize, safety-sensitive employees are subject to pre-employment, post-accident, random and reasonable suspicion testing. Railroads have to develop and submit their programs to FRA including the system for randomly selecting employees for the unnounced random tests. An employee such as the conductor may be perfectly within his rights to take certain otherwise-prohibited substances if properly prescribed by a doctor. Should an employee show a positive test, the results are reviewed by the Medical Review Office prior to any decision about penalties. The programs are subject to FRA audit and I suggest there are no clubby arrangements. The UP conductor undoubtably is aware of the testing requirements (railroads are required to provide training) and should know that evidence of marijuana use can stay in one's system for days if not weeks after use.



Subject Written By Date/Time (PST)
  Chatsworth revisited d 03-04-2009 - 09:46
  List of exhibits [link] OPRRMS 03-04-2009 - 11:54
  Re: List of exhibits [link] OPRRMS 03-04-2009 - 13:26
  Re: Chatsworth revisited John Bruce 03-04-2009 - 14:21
  Re: Chatsworth revisited Mike 03-04-2009 - 14:28
  A Second Engineer Would Have Told Sanchez To Pound Sand Holly Gibson 03-04-2009 - 15:39
  Re: A Second Engineer Would Have Told Sanchez To Pound Sand david vartanoff 03-04-2009 - 17:49
  Re: A Second Engineer Would Have Told Sanchez To Pound Sand WAF 03-04-2009 - 18:41
  Re: A Second Engineer Would Have Told Sanchez To Pound Sand John Galt 03-04-2009 - 19:03
  Re: A Second Engineer Would Have Told Sanchez To Pound Sand Earl 03-05-2009 - 09:50
  Re: Chatsworth revisited OPRRMS 03-04-2009 - 18:48
  This $200 Device Probably Would Have Prevented The Chatsworth Wreck Holly Gibson 03-04-2009 - 20:41
  Rules Compliance J 03-05-2009 - 05:21
  Re: Rules Compliance John Bruce 03-05-2009 - 07:50
  Re: Rules Compliance J 03-05-2009 - 10:46
  Re: Rules Compliance Ed Von Nordeck 03-05-2009 - 20:12
  Re: Rules Compliance John Bruce 03-06-2009 - 08:39
  Re: Rules Compliance Dr Zarkoff 03-06-2009 - 17:53
  Re: Rules Compliance not Zarkoff 03-07-2009 - 11:00
  Re: This $200 Device Probably Would Have Prevented The Chatsworth Wreck crmeatball 03-05-2009 - 11:44
  Re: This $200 Device Probably Would Have Prevented The Chatsworth Wreck hogger 03-05-2009 - 12:13
  Re: 'hogger' and insight Steven D. Johnson 03-05-2009 - 21:36
  Re: Chatsworth revisited Extra Board 03-05-2009 - 21:31
  Responding To Hogger Holly Gibson 03-06-2009 - 04:29
  Re: Responding To Hogger hogger 03-06-2009 - 07:14
  Re: Responding To Hogger Dr Zarkoff 03-06-2009 - 11:26
  Re: Responding To Hogger BOB2 03-06-2009 - 12:39
  Re: Responding To Hogger Dr Zarkoff 03-06-2009 - 15:29
  Re: Responding To Hogger z 03-06-2009 - 18:22
  Re: Responding To Hogger Dr Zarkoff 03-06-2009 - 18:55
  Re: Responding To Hogger OldPoleBurner 03-07-2009 - 13:34
  Re: Responding To Hogger Dr Zarkoff 03-07-2009 - 23:22
  Re: Responding To Hogger Jan van Eck 03-08-2009 - 17:38
  A Conductor Can't Be In Multiple Places Simultaneously Holly Gibson 03-12-2009 - 14:13
  Re: A Conductor Can't Be In Multiple Places Simultaneously GRRR 03-13-2009 - 10:38


Go to: Message ListSearch
Subject: 
Your Name: 
Spam prevention:
Please, enter the code that you see below in the input field. This is for blocking bots that try to post this form automatically.
 **     **  **     **  **    **  **    **  **       
 ***   ***   **   **   ***   **  ***   **  **       
 **** ****    ** **    ****  **  ****  **  **       
 ** *** **     ***     ** ** **  ** ** **  **       
 **     **    ** **    **  ****  **  ****  **       
 **     **   **   **   **   ***  **   ***  **       
 **     **  **     **  **    **  **    **  ******** 
This message board is maintained by:Altamont Press
You can send us an email at altamontpress1@gmail.com