America's Opioid Crisis: What Employers and Their Counsel Need to Know
In addition to causing widespread misery in society as a whole, opioids are producing specific challenges in the workplace. As just one example, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reports a 25-percent increase from 2012 to 2017 in the number of workers fatally overdosing on the job.
April 16, 2019 at 12:15 PM
6 minute read
Nearly every issue of social change has eventually found its way into the workplace. Work is where, for example, Americans continue to wrestle with issues of discrimination and harassment, with a wide range of personal privacy issues, and with many of the most sensitive aspects of their health care (and how it is paid for). That premise continues to persist, as employers across the country struggle with the work-related aspects of the opioid crisis.
What Is the Opioid Crisis?
Opioids are medicines designed to relieve pain. They are also highly addictive, often induce a sense of euphoria and can trigger dangerous physical and behavioral changes. According to research by the American Psychiatric Association, nearly a third of Americans say they know someone who is or has been addicted to opioids or prescription painkillers.
The costs of opioid addiction are similarly staggering. The National Institutes of Health estimates that opioid addictions cost the United States over $500 billion a year. In Ohio (a state particularly hard hit by the epidemic), authorities estimate the crisis is costing $5.4 million each day in medical and work loss costs across the state.
Opioid Addiction Is a Workplace Issue
In addition to causing widespread misery in society as a whole, opioids are producing specific challenges in the workplace. As just one example, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reports a 25-percent increase from 2012 to 2017 in the number of workers fatally overdosing on the job. In this respect and myriad others, employers inevitably are being forced to make difficult decisions about handling addicted workers (and, in some cases, their family members), potential accommodations for affected workers, and the role of the workplace in treatment programs. So as the opioid crisis continues, what should employers and their counsel be doing to prepare for and respond to this problem?
Screening for Opioids
It is not difficult to include opioids in a workplace drug testing program, whether pre-employment or otherwise. What can be difficult, however, is determining whether a positive result on that test indicates that the worker or applicant is using an illicit drug or is simply taking an opioid medication as prescribed by a doctor. In order to avoid discriminating against disabled individuals taking prescribed opioids, employers should give those who test positive an opportunity to produce a prescription.
Protections under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) for those who test positive can apply to a broad range of scenarios, particularly for individuals in treatment for addiction. For example, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) is currently suing a Texas company it says fired a worker who was taking prescribed methadone as part of a drug treatment program, and has pursued cases against other employers for firing workers whose positive results stem from prescribed medications.
ADA Issues: Must Employers 'Reasonably Accommodate' Opioid Addictions?
Under the ADA, the current use of illegal drugs is not a disability, regardless of its health effects. Consequently, an employer is not required to accommodate illegal drug use by allowing workers to use such drugs or be under the influence of them at work. Similarly, employers do not have to accommodate the behavioral changes that can accompany opioid addiction, such as tardiness, absenteeism, lack of concentration, dishonesty,and the like. However, individuals who have successfully completed a supervised drug rehabilitation program (or are currently in one) and are no longer using such drugs are legally protected. Given the public policy benefits of encouraging participation in rehab programs, the EEOC is likely to continue to focus on enforcing protections for workers enrolled in them.
Supervisor Training: More Important Than Ever
Opioids can cause dramatic, negative changes in behavior, including violence. They can also trigger medical crises, such as overdoses. These and other symptoms of addiction can happen anywhere, including in the workplace. As a result, employers should train their managers and supervisors regarding the warning signs of worker addiction (including both physical and behavioral signs) and create systems for reporting any such concerns to human resources or safety personnel.
Narcan: Should You Stock It?
Narcan is a brand name of naloxone, a potentially life-saving treatment for opioid overdoses. It is available without a prescription in most states. Surgeon General Jerome Adams has urged employers to keep a stock of naloxone at their worksites, in much the same way that many employers have defibrillators available for heart attack victims and EpiPens for allergic reactions. If you do decide to add Narcan to your emergency kit, make it part of a broader safety program and train managers in its use.
Leaves of Absence for Treatment—for Workers and Their Families
Workers who qualify for the protections of the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) are entitled to up to three months of job-protected leave for certain types of drug treatment. And just as qualified workers may take job-protected leave for their own treatment, so they may also take leave to care for immediate family members being treated for a “serious health condition,” such as opioid addiction. Given the sheer number of Americans coping with opioid-related issues, however, while the FMLA does provide leave for drug treatment it does not protect workers whose absences are caused by drug abuse.
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
Trending Stories
- 1'I'm Staying Everything': Texas Bankruptcy Judge Halts Talc Trials Against J&J
- 2What We Know About the Kentucky Judge Killed in His Chambers
- 3Judge Blasts Authors' Lawyers in Key AI Suit, Says Case Doomed Without Upgraded Team
- 4Ex-Prosecutor and Judge Fatally Shot During Attempted Arrest on Federal Corruption Charges
- 5Federal Judge Won't Stop Title IX Investigation Into Former GMU Law Professor
Who Got The Work
Charles A. Weiss of Holland & Knight has entered an appearance for Rafael Badalov in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed July 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Lee Law on behalf of Otter Products LLC, accuses the defendant of selling counterfeit phone cases and accessories bearing the plaintiff's 'OtterBox' trademark. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nina R. Morrison, is 1:24-cv-05214, Otter Products, LLC v. Badalov et al.
Who Got The Work
Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher partners Benjamin Hershkowitz, Richard W. Mark and Casey J. McCracken and R. Scott Johnson, Thomas M. Patton and Cara S. Donels have entered appearances for Berkshire Hathaway Energy Co. and MidAmerican Energy Co., respectively, in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The case, filed July 17 in Iowa Southern District Court by Nyemaster Goode PC and Caldwell Cassady & Curry on behalf of Midwest Energy Emissions Corp., asserts six patents related to sorbents for the oxidation and removal of mercury. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Stephen H. Locher, is 4:24-cv-00243, Midwest Energy Emissions Corp. v. Berkshire Hathaway Energy Company et al.
Who Got The Work
Michael J. Hickey and Michael L. Jente of Lewis Rice LLC have stepped in to represent Tidal Wave Management in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The case, filed July 18 in Missouri Western District Court by Husch Blackwell on behalf of Waterway Gas & Wash Co., accuses the defendant of using a mark that's confusingly similar to the plaintiff's 'Clean Car Club' mark. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Fernando J. Gaitan Jr., is 4:24-cv-00471, Waterway Gas & Wash Company v. Tidal Wave Management LLC.
Who Got The Work
Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz partners Lauren M. Kofke and William Savitt have stepped in to represent CVS Health and and its top officials in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The complaint, filed Aug. 30 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Chaya Sara Kaufmann, accuses the defendants of failing to disclose that they used misleading forecasts to set premium plans which overstated the profitability of the company's health care benefits segment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Margaret M. Garnett, is 1:24-cv-06595, Kaufmann v. Lynch et al.
Who Got The Work
Robert L. Wallan from Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman has entered an appearance for Findlay Management Group in a pending complaint for declaratory judgment. The complaint, filed on Aug. 8 in Nevada District Court by Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani and Skarzynski Marick & Black on behalf of Houston Casualty Co., seeks to declare that no insurance policy exists between Houston Casualty and Findlay due to there not being an adequate form of delivery and claims that if delivery was substantiated it is rescinded based on material omissions and misrepresentations. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Gloria M. Navarro, is 2:24-cv-01459, Houston Casualty Company v. Findlay Management Group.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250