WASHINGTON– Workers across the country have stood up in the past month to fight for better wages and working conditions.
More Americans are backing worker efforts to speak out: According to a new Gallup poll released last week, nearly 6 in 10 Americans stated they approve of labor unions. Efforts by working people to rally around issues ranging from raising wages to improved access to collective bargaining have led to the highest approval rating since 2008. In addition, millennials reported being more pro-union than any other age group, while the number of respondents who want workers to have more influence in public debate has risen 12 points since 2009.
Online newsmakers make news with organizing wins: The last month has seen significant wins for reporters, especially those whose work is primarily focused online. From The Guardian’s United States based staff, to writers for online giants Gawker, Vice, and Salon, writers have pointed to a greater voice in the workplace, raising wages, and increased benefits as reasons for forming unions.
Hoosier workers win first contract battle: Earlier this month, workers at the Bloomingfoods Co-op, a co-op grocery store chain in Bloomington, IN ratified their first union contract as members of UFCW Local 700. The approximately 250 workers across the co-op’s five stores pointed to raising wages and a fair process for resolving workplace issues as big wins for their first contract.
Department of Energy workers win 2 ½ year contract fight: After nearly three years of negotiations, workers for Battelle, a contractor which operates the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory in Washington State, have agreed on a new contract. The members of the Hanford Atomic Metal Trades Council have cited raising wages and strong benefits as significant victories from the contract.
Sweet home raising wages: Last week, the Birmingham, Alabama City Council passed an ordinance to increase the city’s minimum wage to $10.10 over the next two years. Alabama does not have a state minimum wage, and instead uses the federal minimum wage of $7.25 an hour.
North Carolina City approves significant raising wages victory: By an overwhelming margin, the Greensboro, NC City Council voted to raise wages for city employees, citing a high percentage of working people living below the poverty line. The council’s decision will raise wages to $15 by 2020 for city employees, and will begin with an initial wage hike to $10 an hour for regular employees and $12 for employees who receive benefits.
Working people score major sick leave win in Pittsburgh: Earlier this month, working people rallied the Pittsburgh City Council to pass sweeping new paid sick leave legislation. The bill, which passed by an overwhelming margin, requires employers with 15 employees or more to provide as much as 40 hours of paid sick leave per year, while smaller companies must provide up to 24 hours per year.
WASHINGTON — In a letter to the leadership of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, the Transportation Trades Department, AFL-CIO (TTD), together with member unions and coalition partners, is urging lawmakers to follow established protocol for developing federal drug testing procedures and exclude provisions for hair specimen testing from any House surface transportation bill.
Historically, experts at the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) have determined how and when new drug testing procedures should be administered. Those guidelines are then used by the Department of Transportation (DOT) to create federal drug testing standards for bus and truck drivers, and other transportation employees.
HHS has not determined whether hair is a valid and reliable specimen for use in federal drug tests and has not issued technical guidelines permitting its use. Despite this, a provision in the Senate’s version of the surface transportation bill would circumvent HHS and allow bus and truck companies to use hair samples to comply with DOT drug testing.
“The Senate has undermined the expertise of scientists and potentially jeopardized the jobs of thousands of bus and truck drivers with this unproven testing method,” said TTD President Edward Wytkind. “We urge the House to reject the Senate’s hair testing provision and ensure that federal drug tests are backed by scientific and forensically sound evidence. Nothing less should be acceptable.”
Studies show that hair testing may have an inherent racial bias. Darker and more porous hair retains some drugs at greater rates than lighter hair. Hair specimen can also cause individuals to test positive for drugs they never ingested, as drugs from the environment can absorb into hair and cause positive results.
“The science behind hair testing is questionable and the drug test results it produces may be discriminatory and could produce false positives,” Wytkind warned.
The following organizations joined TTD on the letter:
American Civil Liberties Union Association of Flight Attendants-CWA Air Line Pilots Association American Medical Review Officers, LLC American Train Dispatchers Association Amalgamated Transit Union Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers International Brotherhood of Teamsters Jewish Alliance for Law and Social Action Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights and Economic Justice National Air Traffic Controllers Association National Workrights Institute Sheet Metal, Air, Rail and Transportation Workers-Transportation Division Sailors’ Union of the Pacific Transport Workers Union of America United Steelworkers
In a letter to the Department of Health dated July 29, 2015, President Edward Wytkind of the Transportation Trades Department (TTD) of the AFL-CIO supported the gold standard in drug testing but opposed unsubstantiated hair specimen testing. Read the letter below.
On behalf of the Transportation Trades Department, AFL-CIO (TTD), I write to comment on the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) Request for Information Regarding the Use of the Hair Specimen for Drug Testing. By way of background, TTD consists of 32 affiliate unions that represent workers in all modes of transportation including those who would be directly impacted by any changes made to the current Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs. We therefore have a vested interest in this notice. In addition to the comments that follow, we endorse those submitted independently by TTD affiliates, the Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA), International Association of Sheet Metal, Air, Rail and Transportation Workers-Transportation Division (SMART TD), and the Transport Workers Union of America (TWU).
We reconfirm transportation labor’s commitment to ensuring the highest level of safety across our transportation system. We recognize that an important component of that standard is maintaining a drug-free workforce, and the workers represented by TTD affiliates are dedicated to upholding that principle. TTD unions also share in this commitment by operating effective programs on drug and alcohol education, prevention, and elimination.
As SAMHSA is aware, the Omnibus Transportation Employee Testing Act of 1991 requires the Department of Transportation (DOT) to adopt HHS’s Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs as the foundation of its policies for testing transportation workers for drugs and alcohol. Thus, any changes to HHS’s scientific and technical guidelines will necessarily change DOT drug and alcohol testing policies as well.
SAMHSA’s notice under consideration is a Request for Information regarding a variety of issues related to the use of hair specimen for drug testing. While it is not a proposal to permit hair specimen testing, the notice indicates that the Drug Testing Advisory Board (DTAB) is considering the scientific supportability of amending the Mandatory Guidelines to allow entities to test hair specimen for drug use.
Given that more than six million transportation workers are subject to DOT drug testing requirements, SAMHSA must ensure that any changes to the longstanding federal testing standards are backed by objective, scientifically and forensically sound evidence that prove a new testing method can be applied in an even and fair manner. However, the current state of hair testing cannot meet this requirement, and we respectfully request that SAMHSA not propose hair as an alternative specimen for federal drug tests.
SAMHSA’s Past Concerns for Hair Testing Remain
In 2004, SAMHSA proposed revisions to its Mandatory Guidelines to establish hair as an alternative specimen in drug tests.[1][2] In the preamble of that notice, the agency identified external contamination and hair color as concerns particular to hair specimen testing. Four years later, the agency rescinded its proposal, writing that, “with regard to the use of alternative specimens including hair…significant issues have been raised by Federal agencies during the review process which require further examination, and may require additional study and analysis.”[3] Those same concerns SAMHSA expressed in 2004 remain today.
External Contamination
As noted above, the Omnibus Transportation Employee Testing Act of 1991 requires DOT to test transportation workers for the illegal use of drugs. Restricting workers’ exposure to drugs or proximity to those who illegally use drugs is not contemplated under the statute. As such, SAMHSA must ensure that an alternative specimen and the standards by which to test the specimen can reliably and conclusively prove the donor ingested the drug and was not merely exposed to it. In the case of hair specimen, however, this is not possible.
Exposure to drugs in the environment can contaminate hair, potentially causing the specimen to test positive even in the absence of drug ingestion. In 2004, SAMHSA stated that washing procedures may remove some contaminates, but that testing for a metabolite indicative of only ingestion would differentiate contamination from actual use.[4]
To date, experts have not identified a biomarker indicating ingestion of cocaine or marijuana. Without such a substance to test for, workers are forced to put their faith in labs’ washing methods to remove external contaminates. The theory holds that these procedures eliminate contaminates and what remains after completion of the wash is the presence of ingested drugs.
However, it is widely held that wash procedures are not capable of removing all contaminates from the specimen. The residue left behind is particularly troubling in hair testing because the concentration at which labs test for drugs in hair is extremely small – at the nanogram and pictogram levels. Thus, even the slightest remains of passive contamination could cause a worker to test positive for a drug she or he never ingested. As additional states legalize the recreational use of marijuana, this concern will continue to grow.
If an individual may be barred from gaining employment or fired from her/his job solely on the basis of a positive drug test, SAMHSA must have complete confidence in the accuracy and reliability of that test result. The possibility of passive contamination of hair specimen does not allow for such confidence.
Hair Color, Treatments, and Disparate Impact
Natural qualities and treatment of hair can also affect how hair specimen test for drugs. For instance, melanin is a known receptor for certain drugs. Some evidence shows that individuals with darker hair retain some drugs at greater levels than those with lighter hair. Also, cosmetic treatments such as dying or straightening can damage hair and increase the absorption of drugs. Similarly, curly hair may be prone to damage and thus more susceptible to drug bonding.
In light of this evidence, some have raised concerns for whether hair testing inherently has a racial bias. While SAMHSA dismissed this concern in 2004, we highlight an ongoing case alleging a hair testing program caused disparate on the basis of race.
Ten African Americans brought a case before the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit against the Boston Police Department’s (BPD) drug testing program. The plaintiffs claimed “that the department’s program, which used hair samples to test for illegal drug use, caused a disparate impact on the basis of race in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.”[5]
As part of their case, the plaintiffs presented eight years of BPD drug program test results demonstrating a statistical significance in the difference in rates at which African Americans tested positive for cocaine compared to their Caucasian counterparts. In May 2014, the Court found that the “difference in outcomes…were not random” and that, “we can almost be certain that the difference in outcomes associated with race over that [eight year] period cannot be attributed to chance alone.”[6] The Court held that the plaintiffs proved “beyond reasonable dispute a prima facie case of disparate impact under Title VII” of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.[7] In doing so, the Court reversed and remanded the US District Court for the District Massachusetts summary judgement to the defendants.
While the case is now back at the District Court, the May 2014 decision must not be taken lightly. The possibility that a drug testing program can discriminate is deeply troubling. Discrimination has no place in federal regulation, and we must insist that new federal testing standards can be applied evenly to all participants.
Lack of Standardization
Today, virtually no standardization exists among hair testing programs. SAMHSA examines this issue in the notice, requesting feedback on whether federal standards should be set for various aspects of hair tests. As SAMHSA considers the lack of standards for hair testing, we refer the agency to the highly standardized procedures contained in the Mandatory Guidelines on urine specimen testing.
For decades, HHS has required employers to test workers for the illicit use of drugs by testing employee urine. The HHS Mandatory Guidelines provide comprehensive and standardized procedures for the complete process of urine testing. These requirements include that urine specimen collectors and Medical Review Officers receive initial and recurrent training on urine testing standards; specify exact procedures for capturing, labeling, and shipping specimens; and specify testing requirements and procedures labs must follow. These standards help ensure professionalism and consistency in the collection of specimens and helps reduce discrepancy and error in the treatment of specimen.
While labs performing hair testing conceal much of their information under proprietary protection, publicly available information shows vast inconsistencies in hair testing today. Labs collect different amounts of hair and from different locations, they boast superiority of their version of external contamination wash procedures and analysis of the wash solution, they use various methods to analyze hair specimen, and they even use different cutoff levels at which a test result is considered positive or negative. There is no standardized training requirement for collectors, and labs and their procedures are not held to the high standard of the National Laboratory Certification Program.
We understand that SAMHSA could set these parameters if it proposed hair specimen testing. We also recognize that labs performing these tests will likely provide the agency with a wealth of information about their procedures. But we urge the agency to critically examine that feedback. Just late last year, the Massachusetts Superior Court[8] upheld a 2013 ruling by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Civil Service Commission that “the present state of hair testing…does not meet the standard of reliability necessary to be routinely used as the sole grounds to terminate a tenured public employee under just cause standards…” (emphasis in original).[9] The Commission’s decision provides detailed concerns for a variety of aspects of hair testing, including problems with external contamination and the processes and cutoff levels used by the lab performing the employees’ hair tests.[10]
We continue to believe that a drug-free, safe workforce can be achieved while simultaneously protecting the rights and dignities of individual workers. The longstanding HHS drug testing standards have proven effective at maintaining a high level of safety while helping to protect workers from flawed testing techniques, human error, and other issues capable of impacting a drug test result. As adopted by the Department of Transportation, today’s urine testing standards also provide workers with appropriate and necessary due process rights.
The decades-old standards are effective and should continue to be held as the gold standard. Hair testing is not mature enough to be a trusted measure of illicit drug use, and it should be rejected.
We appreciate the opportunity to comment on this notice, and we respectfully request our comments receive due consideration.
Sincerely,
Edward Wytkind
President
[1] Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Department of Health and Human Services, Proposed Revisions to Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs. April 13, 2004, 69 FR 71, 19673-19732.
[2] In addition to hair specimen, SAMHSA’s 2004 notice also proposed to make oral fluid and sweat alternative specimens for drug testing.
[3] Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Department of Health and Human Services, Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs, Revised Guidelines. November 25, 2008, 73 FR 228, page 71858.
[4] Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Department of Health and Human Services, Proposed Revisions to Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs. April 13, 2004, 69 FR 71 19673-19732, page 19675.
[5] Ronnie Jones, et al. v. City of Boston, et al. No 12-2280 (1st Cir. 2014), page 3.
[6] Id. at 11.
[7] Id. at 47.
[8] Boston Police Department v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts Civil Service Commission, Suffolk Superior Ct. No. 13-1250-A
[9] In Re Boston Police Department Drug Testing Appeals (“D” Cases), Commonwealth of Massachusetts Civil Service Commission, page 107.
[10] Id. The 2013 case was brought before the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Civil Service Commission by ten Boston police officers who were terminated by the Boston Police Department after they tested positive for cocaine on hair tests. The officers denied use of cocaine and challenged their terminations on the basis that the science of hair testing is not sound and “the process used to collect and test their samples were seriously flawed, making the test results insufficient to prove ‘just cause’ for their termination.” The Commission reinstated six of the officers with back pay.
Washington, DC — Edward Wytkind, president of the Transportation Trades Department, AFL-CIO (TTD), issued this statement on the Comprehensive Transportation and Consumer Protection Act of 2015, introduced by Sen. John Thune (R – S.D.):
Wytkind
“At a time when our country’s transportation infrastructure is failing and disenfranchised Americans are desperate for work, bipartisan support is crucial to fund our nation’s highway and transit systems, and boost job creation.
“Instead of following a bipartisan model — as Senators James Inhofe (R-OK) and Barbara Boxer (D-CA) of the EPW Committee demonstrated last month — Commerce Committee Republicans are unwisely using their section of the surface transportation reauthorization bill to advance a partisan agenda that harms workers.
“The Thune bill includes a poorly veiled measure designed to blame workers and their unions for all port delays during a bargaining dispute. It also prematurely allows the use of hair specimens for drug testing of bus and truck drivers. These provisions have no place in any portion of the surface transportation reauthorization bill.
“Sen. Thune’s bill also fails to require rail carriers to provide emergency responders with information about the amount and type of hazardous materials moving through their localities — a commonsense measure that is critical to the efforts of first responders to save lives.
“The highway/transit reauthorization bill is one of the most important initiatives Congress will consider this year. Senate Commerce Committee Republicans must stop playing partisan politics with this already long-delayed transportation investment bill, and reject proposals that undermine the rights of employees and fail to support our transportation system.”
Washington, DC — Edward Wytkind, president of the Transportation Trades Department, AFL-CIO (TTD), issues this statement on the consideration of the Amtrak Reauthorization bill:
“We applaud Senators Roger Wicker and Cory Booker for working in a bipartisan fashion to craft a sensible Amtrak Reauthorization bill that will be considered by the Commerce Committee today. The bill proposed by Wicker and Booker provides Amtrak with higher funding levels than the bill passed by the House, and includes reforms to the rail financing program that meet pressing needs to replace 100-year-old rail tunnels and other major infrastructure projects.
“While we strongly support these provisions, we remain concerned that the Wicker-Booker bill allows entities other than Amtrak to bid on service without full assurances that these rail operators will be covered by the same rail labor laws Amtrak follows today. If entities other than Amtrak are going to compete for business in the intercity passenger rail sector, then they should be required to comply with the same rail labor statutes and not be permitted to gain a competitive advantage at the expense of rail employees.
“While we are pleased that the bill contains provisions to bolster rail safety, we believe this legislation misses the chance to advance a number of common sense reforms that will make rail transportation safer. We also reject efforts to use this bill to mandate inward-facing cameras without basic privacy and anti-harassment protections for workers who spend up to 70 hours a week in locomotive cabs.
“We look forward to working with Senators Wicker and Booker to address these shortcomings and to craft a final bill that ensures our nation’s passenger rail system receives the funding and support needed to make it an engine for good jobs, mobility and strong economic growth.”
Transportation Division Missouri State Legislative Director Ken Menges asks members for their support. Next week is the final week of the 2015 legislative session and the senate is planning to debate the state’s “right to work” anti-labor bill.
“We are being asked by the Mo. AFL-CIO to ‘pack’ the gallery of the senate next week. If any SMART member could spend a few hours in Jefferson City next week at the Capitol it would be greatly appreciated,” Menges said. “I know that our schedules are hectic, but a few hours any day would be a great help.”
Mo. AFL-CIO President Michael Louis said, “We are faced with the worst attack on labor and working families ever. Right to work has passed the house and now awaits floor debate to pass the senate. We must all unite to stop this unfair and unnecessary attack.
“Everyday next week, Monday through Friday, there is a very good chance that right to work will be on the senate floor. With one stroke of the pen all of the working conditions, wages and fringe benefits that have been fought for decades can be taken away from Missouri workers.”
Members planning to fill the senate gallery should call the Mo. AFL-CIO at (573) 634-2115 so that they can create a schedule to spread out the crowds over the course of the week. Monday’s session begins at 11 a.m. and 8:30 a.m. the rest of the week. Members can also call the Mo. state legislative board at (573) 634-3303 for further assistance.
Washington, D.C. — The Transportation Trades Department, AFL-CIO (TTD) and its 32 member unions hosted a Roundtable with Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx April 30 to urge action on a broad policy agenda unveiled by TTD unions in February:
“Washington, DC is too often defined by dysfunction and inaction,” said TTD President Edward Wytkind, following the Roundtable. “Today’s dialogue with Secretary Foxx focused on how we can cooperate to break this cycle of gridlock and make meaningful progress on the transportation issues that confront the nation.”
“Working to ensure critical investments in our transportation system has always been one of TTD’s greatest strengths,” said Secretary Foxx. “At the Department of Transportation, we recognize our transportation union partners as essential allies in keeping workers safe and maintaining America’s competitiveness in the global economy.”
A major topic of discussion is how the Administration can work with TTD affiliates and Congress to finally complete the rewrite of several overdue transportation laws including the highway/transit, aviation, rail safety, Amtrak and hazardous materials reauthorizations.
“Our unions emphasized the need for action on legislative initiatives that protect good transportation jobs, expand transportation investments and address mounting safety threats,” Wytkind said. “We also warned against wrongheaded reforms that would undermine collective bargaining rights or worker protections in our laws.”
TTD affiliates pressed for strong enforcement of aviation trade agreements to ensure U.S. airlines and their employees can compete on a level playing field. And TTD unions urged more action to fortify and expand the U.S.-flag maritime sector and specifically the Maritime Security Program.
“We will continue to engage on globalization and trade issues that if left unchecked, threaten to destroy the middle class jobs that for decades have been the cornerstone of the transportation sector,” Wytkind added.
The Union Plus Scholarship Program is once again offering up scholarships ranging from $500 to $4,000 to help union members and their children attend college. These one-time cash awards are for study beginning in the Fall each year and students may re-apply every year that they are enrolled in school. The deadline to apply for the 2015 scholarship is Saturday, Jan. 31, 2015, at 12 p.m. (eastern time).
Since 1992, the program has awarded more than $3.6 million to students of union families. Applicants are evaluated according to academic ability, social awareness, financial need and appreciation of labor. It is recommended that students have a GPA of 3.0 or higher.
To apply, students, their parents or spouses must have been a union member for at least one year and this minimum must be satisfied by May 31, 2015. The applicant must also be accepted into a U.S. accredited college or university, community college or technical or trade school at the time the award is issued. The scholarship must be used for the 2015-2016 school year.
Scholarships will be awarded by May 31. During the first two weeks of June, award recipients will be individually notified by mail. To learn more or to apply for the scholarship, click here.
The AFL-CIO Bonnie Ladin Union Skills (BLUS) Training Program offers weeklong intensive courses for union leaders, staff and activists that combine in-class instruction with discussions of real-world experiences shared by a diverse group of students. The main training areas include:
Union administration;
Collective bargaining (private and public sector);
Organizing (internal and external);
Arbitration and grievance handling;
Communications and media; and
Best financial practices.
BLUS courses are taught by a corps of experienced instructors, to help participants to better serve their union and community brothers and sisters. The BLUS experience brings rising union and community ally leaders together in a spirit of mutual development and camaraderie.
CHARLESTON, W.Va. – U.S. Rep. Nick J. Rahall told West Virginia union leaders on Tuesday that people who believe cheaper, non-union labor is good for American business are “short-sighted.” “Union labor also helps increase corporate America’s bottom line with your safety standards and the quality of your work,” Rahall said at the event hosted by the State Building Trades Council. Read the complete story at the Charleston Gazette.
WASHINGTON – Workers across the country have stood up in the past month to fight for better wages and working conditions.
The Union Plus Scholarship Program is once again offering up scholarships ranging from $500 to $4,000 to help union members and their children attend college. These one-time cash awards are for study beginning in the Fall each year and students may re-apply every year that they are enrolled in school. The deadline to apply for the 2015 scholarship is Saturday, Jan. 31, 2015, at 12 p.m. (eastern time). 
The AFL-CIO Bonnie Ladin Union Skills (BLUS) Training Program offers weeklong intensive courses for union leaders, staff and activists that combine in-class instruction with discussions of real-world experiences shared by a diverse group of students. The main training areas include: