Seven Congressmen have penned a letter to the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration calling for the agency to allow hair testing instead of urine testing to be used in drug screenings for truckers.
US Reps Rick Crawford, R-AR; Don Bacon, R-NE; Bruce Westerman, R-AR; Martha McSally, R-AZ.; Steve Womack, R-AR; French Hill, R-Ark.; and Ted Budd, R-NC, all signed the letter which would allow specific carriers to forgo the requirement that driver drug testing must be conducted by urinalysis.
Thirteen large carriers were mentioned by name in the letter who have requested an exemption from the rule in order to allow them to use hair testing for pre-employment drug screenings. The congressmen cited the carriers’ arguments that hair testing is more accurate and is “more reliable in identifying lifestyle drug users” than urine testing.
The congressmen point out that hair testing guidelines have been called for in the FAST Act, but that they could be years away. Therefore, they asked the FMCSA to remove the requirement for urinalysis since conducting only the hair test would “enable the carriers to collectively save more than $2 million each year.”
Supporters of hair testing claim that while urine testing only reveals drug use during the prior few days, hair testing can reveal drug use stretching back much further.
Opponents, including OOIDA and 32 AFLCIO member unions point out that while hair testing does return more positive results than urine testing, that isn’t necessarily a good thing. They claim hair testing has been shown to provide false positives.
Numerous commenters on the carriers’ application point out that hair testing could return a false positive from incidental exposure to restricted drugs even in public places. They also point out that a lack of federal guidelines isn’t a reason to rush in to allowing testing, but instead is a reason to exercise caution.
The carriers who have asked for the exemption are KLLM Transport, Crete Carrier Corp., Shaffer Trucking, Werner Enterprises, FFE Transportation, US Xpress, Cargo Transporters, HUB Group, J.B. Hunt Transport, Inc., Schneider National Carriers, Inc., Knight Transportation, Inc., Dupre Logistics, Inc. and Maveric Transportation, LLC.
Comments are still being accepted on the request. If you’d like to leave a public comment for the FMCSA you can do so here.
Source: truckinginfo, overdrive, thetrucker, truckersreport, truckersreport, DOT
Pretty soon it will be illegal to be human !!!
Hahaha, those scrub companies are going to collectively save $2 million? So less than $200k per company?…that’s barely trucks’ revenue.
Say what you want about Swift and England but if the industry leaders aren’t doing it, maybe it isn’t worth it. Its surprising JB Hunt is on there but they’re pretty exclusionary so I guess it makes sense
You congressmen want ever more intrusive drug testing? Fine….we’ll begin with you….how about YOU be tested every month, before you recieve your government assistance check!
Is the gov’t going to hair follicle test the congressmen to make sure they can do their job as well or the administrative people from the trucking companies that want the exemption?? I thought not!! COWARDS!!
I suggest that all politicians be randomly tested as well. Have a minimum IQ, common sense and get fired when they lie.
But then there would be no politicians.
I don’t see a problem with it as long as the congressmen are held to the same requirements.
They would drop this like a live wire!
We are the CONTROLLED!
Well, just take a look at the carriers that want the hair testing. I’ve been out here long enough to see why they do. They got some real winners driving those trucks. LOL
The simple truth is if you don’t do drugs, you got nothing to worry about. If you do, you shouldn’t be driving anything let alone an 80,000 lb weapon of mass destruction. I care about hair testing as much as I do urine testing. Not at all. 😉
Except for the fact that hair testing has been proven to show an unacceptable number of false positive results. So, even if you do not do drugs, you may indeed have something to worry about.
You guys mention you are controlled but yet you are still out there driving while they continually violate our constitutional rights instead of collectively sending a message to these individuals who know nothing about the industry. I know there was something in the infrastructure bill to get you guys paid for sleeping in that truck every night. Bet I can count on one hand how many will call in if that doesn’t make the cut.
What if they’re bald? How far will they go to invade their privacy then? Just thinking ahead…
Ive been told hair from your arm, armpit, legs, or even your unmentionables is acceptable to source a sample for testing, if your head happens to be bald. Eyebrows, eyelashes, or for some old dudes, nose and ear hair should work as well.
While you may believe that this unduly intrusive foray into everybody’s privacy does not affect you, you would be incorrect. It will affect you ,eventually, and you may wish to consider this; you’re freedom will not likely disappear all at once, but it will disappear bit by bit with this sort of legislation, until one day ,when you wake up to find that freedom is all. Gone.
Hair ? What hair ? I wish I still had hair . ?
The real reason for all these over regulations and control is to maintain the “truckers shortage”.
These people are deliberately driving out truck drivers out of trucking so they can coerce and extort more money from businesses and drivers. They want to make shippers to “beg” for truckers that are dinishing in numbers and extort money from businesses, truckers, and force consumers to pay for all these crap.
I agree with the first few people I think that congress should be required to do random and hair follicle drug tests lets see how many of them get axed! and did anyone notice out of the seven congressman that signed that letter four of them are from Arkansas which is where Maverick has a big corporate office? hmmmm i would bet that prick that owns maverick is giving the reps from arkansas a little something extra!
I have a friend of mine who was a lab technician for Quest Diagnostics which is a company that conducts drug testing. He told me that hair follicle testing is not a very reliable method for detecting cannabinoids (Canabis) because the substance does not bind to the hair follicle. He also told me that there are far more false negatives then there are positives. 50% of all people that fail drug tests are pot users so my question is what is really the effectiveness of the hair follicle test if it’s only going to be the standard.
Secondly hair follicle testing is extremely expensive so companies that are going to be paying for these tests for new drivers are going to make up there added expenses elsewhere where do you think that’s going to come from? yep you got it the drivers paycheck.
My recommendation is that Congress be subject to the same drug testing.!!!
Drug test Congress
My husband was subject to a hair test and was told they go up to 7 years back. Seriously how fair is that? People do a lot of stupid things when they are young,but people change. Hes not the same person as he was back then so why should he be punished for something from that far back in his life? I think it’s ignorant and they need to quit screwing with and punishing truckers with all these new laws. I’m all for drug testing because they need to be safe and keep us safe but give it a rest already. Quit trying to control every little thing!
the only way to make this industry safe and profitable for the driver, is for drivers to quit driving for these bottom feeder companies, there only interest is in profit not safety. how many werner trucks rolled this week, maybe fmcsa should look at that figure. the drug testing should not be performed by trucking companies, testing should be performed by dot officials to insure full compliance with the regulations
Any and all gov workers should just like every body else should be tested, ramdomly like truck drivers.
If you do not do drugs then you have nothing to worry about. But these congressman have nothing better to do other than harass us.
I think the time to catch the drug user is before he or she gets their CDL .
I think the Supreme Court erred when it held nearly 3 decades ago that the government mandate random controlled substance and alcohol testing was not a violation of the Fourth Amendment. The dissent was quite right. See International Brotherhood of Railway Labor Executives v. Skinner.
The decision of the majority of the Court held that there is a lower level of expectation of privacy in commercial vehicle operations. It further held that the drivers had adequate protections in the DOT’s regulations. There are only minimal protections in my view and they are wholly inadequate as there is no meaningful appeal process. The MRO is judge, jury and executioner. I think it is high time for new rulemaking on this issue.