Random 3M Drug Tests End; Court Test Avoided

Officials at the 3M plant in Camarillo have agreed to permanently abandon a sweeping, random drug-testing program that was challenged in court by company workers.

The firm’s decision this week not to take the case to trial came in the wake of a preliminary injunction, issued Jan. 6 by Ventura Superior Court Judge Allan L. Steele, ordering the company to halt the program until further review by the court. Steele signed a permanent injunction Thursday.

The suit against 3M was filed by Michael A. Mora, 31, of Oxnard, who was suspended from his job at the plant last June after refusing to take a company drug test. Mora’s suit contended that the testing violated a right-to-privacy amendment to the state Constitution.

“We accomplished what we set out to do and that was to stop the drug tests,” Mora said Friday. “I felt personally violated by them. It’s a degrading process.”

Mora’s attorney, Richard Weinstock, said 3M’s capitulation was “basically a business consideration” and not an admission that its policy was bad.

At Employes’ Request

Barbara Perkins, a 3M spokeswoman in St. Paul, Minn., where the company is based, said 3M’s drug-testing program was developed in response to concerns expressed by about 30 employees who said many of their co-workers were under the influence of drugs or alcohol while on the job.

All 1,000 employees at the 3M plant in Camarillo, including those in management, were subject to at least one random drug test a year. When the program was in effect, a company computer randomly selected the 25 employees each week for testing. They were tested for traces of marijuana, cocaine, heroin, amphetamines, barbiturates and alcohol.

No one was fired because of the tests, Perkins said, although some were referred to a company drug rehabilitation program. More than 700 were tested in the 11 months the program was in operation. Of those, 32 tested positive for marijuana, cocaine or alcohol.

The injunction allows 3M to continue screening prospective employees for drug use. The company will also test workers suspected of substance abuse.

“I think, at this point, those programs will be sufficient to maintain a safe working environment,” Perkins said.

Potential Impact Lessens

Although the suit was widely watched as a legal test of mandatory drug screening, the out-of-court settlement reduces the case’s influence. Under California law, cases that are not heard in the Court of Appeal cannot set legal precedent, according to Weinstock.

Nevertheless, those familiar with the case said the resolution could affect the drug-screening programs of many California companies.

“Employers are keeping their eyes on these cases to see what’s happening,” said Ed Chen, an attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union, which has opposed drug testing. “The word is increasing that you can’t have random drug tests.”

Critics of random drug testing contend results of urinalysis tests typically used to detect drugs are often inaccurate and difficult to analyze, and thus unfairly jeopardize jobs.

The 3M case marks the first time a California company has agreed to abide by a permanent injunction to stop a random drug-testing program, Chen said.

3M’s decision comes at a time when both state and federal courts have become increasingly active in halting drug-testing programs in similar firms. Chen listed at least five state and five federal cases during the last few months in which judges stopped random drug testing by issuing temporary restraining or other orders.

“I can’t think of an example when a judge agreed” with companies in a drug-testing case, Chen said.

One report found that about 30% of the Fortune 500 companies are doing some form of drug testing. But a survey by a Raleigh, N.C., research firm also found that, of the companies with drug-testing programs, only 13% conducted random screenings similar to the 3M program. Eighty percent used tests for pre-employment screening and 47% administered them after accidents in which drug use was a probable cause, the study found.

Suspended 2 Weeks

Mora, a 7-year employee who seals cartons at the 40-acre Camarillo plant, was suspended for two weeks without pay June 26 for refusing to take a urine test, he said. On that day, he went to his own physician for a urinalysis, which showed no trace of drug use, he said.

Mora, who will receive two weeks’ back pay, did not seek damages, but the injunction signed by Steele stipulates that 3M must pay for his legal expenses, which totaled $27,000. Two other 3M employees, an electrical engineer and a secretary, later joined Mora as plaintiffs in the suit.

Donna DiPaolo, another 3M spokeswoman, said the company “is not upset” by the outcome. She said she does not think the absence of random drug testing will pose a safety threat at the plant.

Mora said morale at the plant was low during the drug testing and the reaction of his co-workers was “extremely favorable” when the outcome was announced.

“A lot of people I don’t have any contact with would come up, slap me on the back and say they were glad it worked out this way,” he said.

The Camarillo plant, one of Ventura County’s largest employers, produces computer tapes, diskettes and other magnetic tape products. It is the only one of 140 plants of 3M worldwide to have had a mandatory drug-testing program.