SB 1183 by Senator Polanco would require the immediate 30-day suspension of a commercial driver’s license for a driver who tests positive for alcohol or drugs. It’s quite obvious which segment of the trucking industry would suffer the greatest if this bill were to become law - - the owner operators. A 30-day suspension would effectively translate to bankruptcy for any given owner operator. We wonder if the sponsors took this fact into consideration when they introduced SB 1183.

Nobody in their right mind would advocate a decrease in vigilance over drug and alcohol abusers. But what we do question is the need to tamper with a federal testing program that already accounts for positive drug tests in a reasonable and practical manner. UHCA is concerned that SB 1183 may entirely bypass the role played by Substance Abuse Professionals (SAP), and instead issue automatic license suspensions upon positive tests. What happens in the case of false positives or extenuating circumstances where the SAP’s discretion is warranted and essential? Does the DMV really have the capacity to take on yet another responsibility of such obvious sensitivity and consequence?

Federal alcohol and drug testing programs currently require motor carriers to test commercial truck drivers in the following ways:

a) conduct tests for specified controlled substances,

b) test employees as a precondition of employment, on periodic and random bases and following accidents,

c) maintain records of tests,

d) prohibit drivers from operating if they test positive or refuse to be tested,

e) establish employee education programs, and

f) provide monitoring for drivers who return to work after testing positive.

Currently, test results are forwarded to the CHP, but no license suspension is required. Employers of drivers who test positive must take the driver out of service until the driver consults with a substance-abuse counselor and tests negative.

It’s quite obvious which segment of the trucking industry would suffer the greatest if this bill were to become law - - the owner operators.

How do you argue for the creation of a more rigid and punitive drug and alcohol testing program in California than anywhere else in the United States? The sponsors of SB 1183 contend that “a loophole exists” whereby a driver taken out of service by employers after a positive test can avoid evaluation by a SAP simply by leaving his/her current job and driving for another employer. Further, owner-operators (self-employed drivers) can refrain from taking themselves out of service and being evaluated by a SAP. We have yet to see any statistics to quantify this “loophole”, nor have any of the drug-testing consortiums we’ve spoken with indicated awareness of this loophole.

If in fact there are drivers who have found and exploited a loophole in the federal drug and alcohol testing provisions, won’t they just as easily find a way to elude statewide enforcement? Is it wise to eliminate safeguards in federal drug and alcohol testing provisions and replace it with a witch-hunt for drivers who abuse substances? We are especially anxious to see how the sponsors of SB 1183 will paint such a grim picture of rampant and unabated drug abuse in California’s trucking industry to our State Legislature.

UHCA will pay close attention to any developments with regards to SB 1183, and have alerted the Federal Highway Administration - Office of Motor Carriers about the potential conflict in state and federal drug testing policies. SB 1183 was shelved by the Senate Transportation Committee, and so we will have to wait until next year for any further legislative activity on this bill.

Back to Volume 35 No. 2 Article Selection