Pennsylvania House of Representatives Passes Drug Test Mandate for School Teachers

By Michael Klazema on 12/31/2013

In mid-December, the Pennsylvania House of Representatives made a big decision regarding applicants to public and private school teaching positions. In a vote that rang victorious with a near-unanimous 182-12 approval, the State House passed a new piece of legislation that would make pre-employment drug testing a common part of background check procedures in schools around the state. The “yes” vote will kick the bill over to the Senate, and if approved there, the law could likely go into effect as soon as 2014.

Unlike other employment screening laws, which generally require employers to run certain background checks on their applicants, but don’t always say precisely what employers should or must do with that information, the Pennsylvania school drug testing bill – officially called “House Bill 810” – really is a mandate. If a drug test indicated that a prospective schoolteacher had recently used a controlled substance other than a personally prescribed medication, law would prohibit the school district from hiring that particular applicant.

That’s not the only unique thing about Pennsylvania House Bill 810. On the contrary, not only would teachers be subject to a high-stakes drug test during their employment screening routine, but they would also be required to shoulder the cost of the drug test themselves. Teachers won’t take kindly to that part of the equation, especially depending on where in the employment screening process the drug test takes place.

From the language of the bill, it sounds as if the drug test would be required after the job had already been offered, with employment being conditional upon clean results. That way, a clean test would guarantee employment, and most applicants wouldn’t be too hesitant to spend the $30 or $50 to finalize their job offer. However, the Pennsylvania State Board of Education would have final say on how the drug tests would be implemented, and some teachers are worried that they could end up paying for multiple drug tests in any given job search with no guarantee for employment. A good compromise for the State of Pennsylvania might be to reimburse teachers who show clean drug test results.

The Pennsylvania State Education Association has another proposal: schools should have to show “probable cause” – or some form of concrete evidence or viable suspicion that an applicant may be using drugs – in order to require a drug test. The teacher’s union believes that the law “intrudes on individual privacy rights” without actually solving any problems, and thinks that state lawmakers should focus instead on creating legislation that helps drug abusers address their problems.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania has similar views, calling House Bill 810 an unconstitutional provision that would subject teachers to invasive and unreasonable searches and seizures. The ACLU has faced down similar legislation in other states, and toppled it through court litigation. The union plans to take this bill to the courts as well, should it pass through the Senate without issue. Like the Pennsylvania State Education Association, the ACLU of Pennsylvania believes the drug-testing bill would not actually solve any problems, mostly because drug use among teachers is a low-rate occurrence anyway. Mandated drug screenings, in most cases, would be a waste of time and money for school educators.

Regardless of the opposition, the bill’s sponsor, a Democrat Representative named Anthony DeLuca, is holding strong in his support for the bill. DeLuca believes that, since drug tests are already common among police officers and even school bus drivers, it would only be reasonable for them to be used for teachers as well. He hopes his bill will “truly make schools drug-free zones” and protect kids and teenagers from the dangers of substance abuse.

While teachers are among the most heavily background checked professionals in any job field, universal drug testing is still rare for the profession., in addition to providing the sort of criminal background checks that are the norm in the education sector, also offers drug-testing solutions. The company uses industry-leading partners to get superior drug test results with quick turnaround times.


Tag Cloud
Recent Posts

Latest News

  • March 20 Employers who use E-Verify must follow the proper steps and procedures when they receive a “tentative non-confirmation notice” from either the Social Security Administration or Department of Homeland Security. Failure to follow the proper procedures can cost employers both time and money. 
  • March 20

    Four Department of Commerce employees are out after their background checks resulted in security clearance denials. All four had worked high-ranking positions for months despite incomplete background checks.

  • March 15 As more states legalize the recreational use of cannabis, they contend with the emergence of new industries surrounding marijuana cultivation and production. 
  • March 14 In most cases, it is easy to determine where an issue might show up on a pre-employment background check. Citations for traffic violations or reckless driving charges will appear on a motor vehicle record check. Verdicts in a civil court case will show on a civil court background check. And criminal convictions—from petty theft to violent felonies—show up on criminal background checks.
  • March 13 How many years back do employment background checks go? This question can have multiple different answers depending on the situation.
  • March 13 A new bill in Florida would require landlords of apartment complexes to present tenants with verifications of employee background checks to give them peace of mind the people working in and around their homes are trustworthy.
  • March 08 Police officers working with the University of Texas at Arlington recently arrested a man who had avoided police capture on a warrant out of Oregon for nearly two decades. The man, whose real name is Daniel Charles Ray Hanson, spent those 17 years using a variety of fake names and identification documents to move around the country, often engaging with educational institutions under false pretenses. Police say Hanson regularly went by at least three different aliases. He sports a rap sheet that stretches back to an arson conviction in 1995. 
  • March 07

    The Future of EEOC Guidance in Texas Is Up in the Air

    The EEOC issued guidance in 2012 warning employers about the dangers of enforcing categorical policies to bar candidates with criminal histories. That guidance is not enforceable in Texas thanks to a recent court ruling.

  • March 05 Vermont is the latest state to restrict employers’ access to and use of social media accounts of employees and applicants. 
  • March 01 In an age of "industry disruptors" turning established business models on their heads, companies such as Uber and Lyft rely on a unique workforce of individuals outside the traditional employer-employee context. Uber calls them "partners" while other businesses refer to them as "independent contractors," the official classification these individuals use for tax purposes. Recently, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) revealed they had warned a business, Postmates, for misclassifying their staff as independent contractors. In the NLRB's determination, these individuals were employees.