Drug Screening, Employee Wellbeing, Productivity and Overheads

The true competitive edge for any organisation is its people. At the core of every thriving business lies a commitment to zero harm and safeguarding the health and well-being of employees.

Workplace drug screening is a common practice for organisations operating in high-risk and highly regulated environments. This article examines the impact of drug screening methods on employee well-being, organisational efficiency, and business costs.

Employee Well-Being

Research conducted by The Australian National Centre for Education and Training on Addiction (NCETA) has revealed a direct correlation between traditional drug testing methods and adverse effects on employee mental health [1]. The invasive nature of urine and saliva tests, coupled with the anxiety and stress associated with the process of drug testing, can contribute to a decline in psychological well-being among employees. This hidden cost, although not readily apparent, poses a significant challenge for organisations aiming to foster a positive workplace culture. The Mental Health Commission of Australia further highlights the parallels between substance abuse and psychological health issues, noting the need for proactive measures to create a supportive work environment. [2]

Financial Loss

Beyond immediate safety concerns, traditional drug testing methods can contribute to tangible economic consequences. According to the ‘Workplace Health and Safety, Business Productivity and Sustainability’ report prepared for Safe Work Australia, prolonged testing procedures, delays in obtaining results, and subsequent productivity losses significantly contribute to operational inefficiencies [3]. Hidden costs can accumulate over time, affecting a business’s bottom line and leading to unsustainable operations.

Operational Efficiency

Conventional drug screening methods via urine or saliva analysis require extended sample collection times, thus maximising employee downtime. A newly conducted research study from the National Centre for Education and Training on Addiction highlighted that Australian workplaces are facing an annual financial loss of $2.9 billion due to absenteeism linked to illicit drug use, adding a layer of complexity for organisations when allocating resources effectively. [4]

The Intelligent Fingerprinting Drug Testing Solution

The Journal of Analytical Toxicology has published research exploring the effectiveness of sweat analysis as an alternative method for workplace drug testing. Sweat analysis can detect a wide range of substances, making it a comprehensive way to identify potential risks in the workplace. Sweat offers a shorter detection window than urine and saliva, allowing real-time insights into an individual’s substance use patterns. This proactive approach can significantly enhance workplace safety measures. [5]

The Intelligent Fingerprinting Drug Screening Solution tests for recent drug use via fingerprint sweat. The method’s short detection window focuses on fitness for duty on the day of testing, upholding employee privacy while maintaining a safe and respectful workplace for all. Businesses can efficiently collect samples and reduce costs by detecting cannabis (THC), cocaine, methamphetamines, and opiates in minutes without the need for specialist staff or facilities.

Conclusion

Organisations should not ignore the correlation between employee mental health, hidden costs, and operational efficiency. While serving a purpose, traditional drug screening methods have drawbacks that affect employee well-being and the financial health of organisations. Fingerprint sweat analysis emerges as a beacon of change. It mitigates the risk of sample adulteration and offers a dignified, noninvasive alternative that targets compliance and risk management. Thus, it ultimately contributes to healthier, safer, and more efficient workplaces.

In pursuing a balanced approach to workplace drug screening, considering the impact on employee mental health and operational efficiencies is prudent and essential for fostering a thriving workforce and sustainable business practices.

References

[1] The National Centre for Education and Training on Addiction (n.d.). The Patterns, Prevalence and Related Issues Associated with Alcohol and Other Drug (AOD) Use Among Australian Workers. Available at: https://nceta.flinders.edu.au/nceta/research_and_projects/examining-patterns-prevalence-and-related-issues-associated-alcohol-and-other-drug-aod-use-among-australian-workers

[2] School of Psychiatry, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia, Black Dog Institute, Sydney, Australia and Australian School of Business, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia (2014). Developing a Mentally Healthy Workplace: A Review of the Literature. Available at: https://www.mentalhealthcommission.gov.au/getmedia/87b96bb9-689c-4308-b58e-37232c1e86a8/Developing-a-mentally-healthy-workplace

[3] Centre for Workplace Leadership, University of Melbourne (2014). Workplace Health and Safety, Business Productivity and Sustainability: a Report Prepared for Safe Work Australia. Available at: https://www.safeworkaustralia.gov.au/system/files/documents/1702/workplace-health-safety-business-productivity-sustainability.pdf

[4] NCETA – the National Centre for Education and Training on Addiction (2023). Alcohol and Other Drug Use: A Focus on Employed Australians. Available at:  https://nceta.flinders.edu.au/application/files/5016/8723/8146/DOH-Workplace-Report-Part1.pdf

[5] Yale H. Caplan, Bruce A. Goldberger, Alternative Specimens for Workplace Drug Testing, Journal of Analytical Toxicology, Volume 25, Issue 5, July-August 2001, Pages 396–399. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1093/jat/25.5.396