Judge denies employer’s drug free workplace and intoxication defenses.

The judge heard the bifurcated issue of the employer’s drug free workplace and intoxication defenses. The claimant asserted that the employer did not have “reason to suspect” that he was under the influence and was not permitted to require him to submit to a drug test post-accident. The claimant also argued that the employer had not fully complied with all the statutory requirements to qualify as a drug free workplace. The employer contended that the claimant refused the post-accident drug test. The judge held that, under the circumstances, the employer had not complied and, therefore, was not permitted to require a drug test and that the claimant had not refused (even if the test had been permitted). The judge further concluded that there was no “reason to suspect” under the statute. The defenses of drug free workplace and intoxication were denied.

_{What’s Hot in Workers’ Comp is prepared by Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin to provide information on recent legal developments of interest to our readers. This publication is not intended to provide legal advice for a specific situation or to create an attorney-client relationship. We would be pleased to provide such legal assistance as you require on these and other subjects when called upon. ATTORNEY ADVERTISING pursuant to New York RPC 7.1 Copyright © 2020 Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin, all rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reprinted without the express written permission of our firm. For reprints or inquiries, or if you wish to be removed from this mailing list, contact tamontemuro@mdwcg.com.}