Latest Headlines
- A Very Good Boy: ECSO K-9 Streeter Awarded Medal Of Courage For Jumping Off Bridge After Suspect
- Plans Refiled For Circle K At Highway 95A, Quintette Road; Intersection Improvements Proposed
- Escambia School Board Buys 36 Acres For $3.9 Million For New Beulah School
- Head On Crash Injures Two In Beulah
- FWC Removes 14 Boaters For Boating Under The Influence During Blue Angels Air Show
- Century Spending Over $3.3 Million On Five Sewage Lift Stations
- Escambia Man Gets Life Sentence For Murdering Roommate Before Staging Her Drowning
- Catholic’s TJ McCants Drafted By Chicago White Sox
- Man Gets 50 Years In Prison For 2022 Murder At Cantonment Gas Station
- Pedestrian Checking Trailer Tire Struck By Car In Two Vehicle Crash Near Century
School Board Approves Tobacco-Free Hiring Policy, Amends Student Drug Testing Plan
June 22, 2011
The Escambia County School Board voted Tuesday night to implement a tobacco-free hiring policy and make a change to the upcoming random student drug testing policy.
The new tobacco-free policy will not allow anyone to be hired that has used tobacco products within the last six months. Along with the standard drug test currently administered, new employees will also be tested for tobacco use. The newly hired employees will be required to remain tobacco free as a condition of employment.
The school board believes the new policy will not only mean healthier employees, but also lower costs associated with health insurance costs and lost days at work.
The policy defines tobacco as any product that includes tobacco intended or expected for human use or consumption, including lighted or unlighted cigarettes, cigars, pipes or any other smoking product, chewing tobacco or snuff. The policy applies to tobacco in any form, including lozenges, strips and pouches. Similar policies have been adopted by other large local employers, including Escambia County, ECUA, Sacred Heart Hospital and Baptist Health Care.
Student Drug Testing
The school board also amended a random student drug testing program set to begin in the fall for middle and high school students that participate in extracurricular activities, athletics or park on campus.
The original policy approved in February stated after an initial positive test, students would be required to contact a district-approved laboratory for another test within 24 hours. The amended policy states that the initial non-negative screening will be maintained under an appropriate chain of custody and sent to a professional lab for additional testing and review by a medical review officer. The district pays for the retest if it’s negative; the parent pays if it is positive.
The amendment must first be advertised prior to final approval by the school board. A public hearing on the change will take place at 5:30 p.m. on July 21.
Under the testing policy, a signed parental consent form will be required of students subject to the testing policy. The consent will be valid during the entire school year, not just for the duration of the athletic season or extracurricular activity period.
Students whose parents do not consent to the tests would not be allowed to participate in the activities — including any practice, tryout, rehearsal or even sit with the team, club or organization at a game or pep rally.
The drug tests will be conducted by the school health nurse or technician under the plan. If a student refuses to participate in a random drug test, it will be considered a positive result.
A positive result will result in the student being removed from all extracurricular and athletic activities, including practices, for at least 30 days and would be suspended from driving on the school campus. The student will be referred to a District-approved drug assessment and rehabilitation program.
A student with a positive drug test result will be required to pass a second drug test before participation in future activities at the expense of their parents. They will be subject to additional random drug tests, and they would remain on probation for the rest of their school years in the Escambia County School District. The student will not be allowed to return to any leadership position — such as captain of a squad, club officer or class officer — for the remainder of the school year.
A second positive result will prohibit a student from participation in all athletics and extracurricular activities and from parking on campus for one full calendar year.
Comments
42 Responses to “School Board Approves Tobacco-Free Hiring Policy, Amends Student Drug Testing Plan”
I believe this is absolutely a waste of money. Schools should have no concern what a student or faculty member does in his or her own house on his or her own time as long as they show up everyday, do their work, try hard, and continue to do so. We are sacrificing more of our tax paying money to give out free drug and tobacco tests so that we wont have to pay for a few peoples medical bills. How often have you heard of a teacher or faculty member having lung problems and leaving the school for a day or days at a time? I’m not saying that it doesn’t happen, but that we would be wasting more money by doing this. I agree that children are going to turn to harder substances just to get by this, and the more rules and restrictions that are set down over this, the worse kids are going to be. Humongous mistake yet again escambia.
I’m pretty sure these random drug tests are going to have a negative effect. Considering that all teens want is to get some sort of high, they’d be willing to do anything. Many Students may just participate in occasional use of not-so-serious drugs, such as marijuana and alcohol, but if those two things were to become difficult to get away with then it will cause students to do harder drugs that don’t stay in your system for as long and can’t be detected by a conventional drug test.
As for the no tobacco policy, I say that staff shouldn’t be allowed to smoke on campus, what someone does at home is there business.
This is garbage. Complete waste of money. What purpose is there to Drug Test the students who have something going for them? Why not test the people who ride buses or AREN’T in extra circular activities? Those are the students who are more likely to do drugs. Also This drug test will only deter students from using THC-based drugs….This could backfire and students begin using more harmful drugs that are out of their system faster. Such as cocaine. WAY TO GO SCHOOL BOARD. You fail. Go back to school.
Congratulations to the Escambia County School Board for adopting a no-smoking hiring policy. Check out the new article at The Partnership at Drugfree.org titled “More Companies Lean on Employees to Stop Smoking to Cut Insurance Costs.” Not only are people who smoke less productive in the workplace, supported by a large and growing body of research, they and their families access the health care system much more often. Why would any business want to add to their health care costs for everyone to support people whose illnesses are largely preventable? Hiring people who don’t smoke is not only a good business strategy, it allows companies to keep offering their employees good benefit packages by getting a handle on soaring health care costs. There is no reason that those who don’t smoke should subsidize people who choose to continue to smoke, and it is a choice and one that may well interfere with moving forward in the job or career of your choice. Time to make a positive change and quit or…just keep complaining…your choice…1-800-QUIT NOW…
The law of unintended consequences? I just think this decision could become an unfortunate precedent, for many others before me have implied it: What will be next? I can see schools and playgrounds as entirely tobacco-free, but it seems unreasonable to request your newly hired ones not to smoke. Programs to help smokers would be great and should be encouraged, but this… I don’t know, but it sounds a bit radical and unconstitutional to me. Actually, if the board really cared, they should require that EVERYBODY, current and new employees, stop smoking.
The one thing I clearly see is I am trying to sell something that is already rubber stamped. I hope for positive results, only time will tell.
REGARDING:
“Why is it correct to test DOD personnel, and incorrect to test high school students? I am curious as to why constitutional protections are afforded to some and denied to others?”
Department of Defense personnel have consented to be tested in order to work for the DOD. Any students who consent can also be tested.
You don’t have a right to work for DOD.
You do have a right to go to school in Florida.
Neither is forced to consent to drug tests.
Good or bad, I don’t see where this is all that hard to understand.
AND:
“What about the current employees who use tobacco?”
“The new tobacco-free policy will not allow anyone to be HIRED that has used tobacco products within the last six months. Along with the standard drug test currently administered, NEW EMPLOYEES will also be tested for tobacco use. The NEWLY HIRED employees will be required to remain tobacco free as a condition of employment.”
Existing users will not be fired if already hired, existing users will not be hired.
So existing employees are forbidden to use other drugs but can start smoking if don’t already (and are stupid), or can continue smoking if already addicted.
David for clarity
To David: Your reasoning ability is admirable. Thank you for sharing
To those of you that think this will lower health care costs, think about this:
Health care companies are corporate. They will do whatever they have to do to make an increase in profits every quarter. Forever. That is their whole focus.
Obviously at some point that scheme is going to backfire, but don’t think there is anything anyone can do to keep down healthcare costs without addressing corporate greed.
Why is it correct to test DOD personnel, and incorrect to test high school studends? I am curious as to why constitutional protections are affored to some and denied to others?
What’s next – testing for bacon & sausage in people that are fat??? Obesity costs the medical field tons of money due to heart problems, diabetes, etc. Should we have a pay scale on your insurance according to your weight?
What about the current employees who use tobacco?
What are you people thinking? Ban smokers or people that chew from the school system? What about the fat people that have co-morbilities due to obesity? Yes, I agree with the drug testing of students involved in sports—-but, get real! Radom tests for all students would be better
I don’t feel they should have this no hire policy with someone is a smoker, but not allow them insurance.
REGARDING:
“I am all about the constitution but we have to do something, these kids are worth saving.”
I am all about the constitution but- – - ??
Before we abandon Constitutional protections, let’s make very sure the cost justifies the result?
As I see it, the approved test should be Constitutional. I doubt it will find many users. Those who DO use won’t submit and those who agree to submit won’t use. There ‘ll be exceptionally stupid kids who both use and submit to testing but they’re far gone anyway.
And then there’s the benefit to consider. Some drug users will become known, others (assuming they’re there) won’t be known because they aren’t tested. Nothing proposed here would stop kids from using drugs, they’d just be off the football team or out of the chess club or whatever.
But you’re not talking about the legal version of voluntary testing; you’re talking about the obviously illegal one of testing all students. That’d find them but what benefit would ensue? You couldn’t arrest them since the search was illegal. You could kick them out of school if you stopped making attendance mandatory, but I’m not sure that would save the children. It might make it better for the others, just as kicking out all bullies and disruptive students would, but I doubt that’s going to happen.
If you decide the Constitution needs to be ignored for the common good, what’s to stop some well-meaning public servant from ignoring any or all other rights “for the public good”?
Maybe we should find ways within the law to handle problems–not decide some things are too important to let law restrain us.
David for the most good for the most people
each one individually
A good point D. H. Green, random testing of all students might be the solution. A computer program could be used to select randomly, a certain number of students SSNs on a weekly or monthly basis. I know if I see a student walking down the hall bug eyed and reeking, he probably needs a test. I was tested for 17 of the 21 years of my military career. In 1982 the party ended, in the USAF anyway, believe me testing works. I am all about the constitution but we have to do something, these kids are worth saving. When they turn 18 they can decide for themselves.
Where’s the data that shows how many kids who are subjected to this drug testing actually fail the test?
What is the purpose of this?
Why are taxpayer funds wasted on testing the kids least likely to use drugs?
Good questions for a school board meeting, don’t ya think.
REGARDING:
“What about the students that don’t participate in extracurricular activities or park on campus? Why aren’t they being drug tested as well?”
This way the drug testing is optional and, therefore, legal. You can’t search people without either their permission or probable cause. They give their permission in exchange for being allowed to park on campus or to be involved in non-required activities.
David for reason
What about the students that don’t participate in extracurricular activites or park on campus? Why aren’t they being drug tested as well? This is how I look at it, if a student plays a sport and doesn’t like that sport and quits then their labeled as a druggy? In my opinion I think all students should be tested!
Anyone who believes tobacco is the reason for high health care rates take a few minutes and research insurance companies profits for 2010.Take a minute to think for yourself and not just believe everything people in power throw at you.
No im not trying to say smoking is a good health choice or that they may not have more medical problems than non smokers.Im just saying it is an excuse for insurance companies to fatten their pockets.
What about sex with multiple partners, it causes HIV-Aids, HPV and is a most certain death sentence which is expensive to treat. What about Alcohol, it causes extreme damage to the liver and brain. Why aren’t they included? If it were about insurance costs all the above would be exclusions too!!
This is an extremely slippery slope , the idea is to keep health insurance cost down. But it will never stop, if its not smoking whats next, soft drinks? Or people of a certain age/weight can only be employed? Or what about family history , if a medical issue runs in the family are they going to review that and not hire you?
This is just opening the flood gates for further discrimination
It is like these kids and job seekers/employees are in jail. What if a teacher smokes? This isn’t right. What happened to “land of the free” ? I believe that after a while, it isn’t going to become random, they are going to start picking people out of the crowd that look suspicious.
REGARDING:
“But nicotine is legal how about taking the right steps,, first make it illegal”
Nah, leave it legal but continue to allow employers to say they don’t want people who use that particular drug to work for them. A thing doesn’t have to be illegal for you to not want to have to put up with it. People are free to get KKK tattoos but the NAACP shouldn’t have to hire those who chose to do so. People are free to wear swastikas, but no synagogue should be forced to hire one as a janitor.
It will be hard on the drug addicts but it’s the path they chose. Let them walk it.
David for freedom to choose whether or not to take drugs
and freedom to decide whether or not to employ based on that choice
In response to: “This is an invasion of our constitutional rights”
Do you mean infringed? Are you referring to the tobacco policy, or the student drug test policy?
Exactly which constitutional right got “invaded”?
It certainly is others business if u smoke…especially if u work with other people. It makes all employees insurance go up
@barrineau..they are adding tobacco testing to their current drug testing which will catch those other drugs.
But nicotine is legal how about taking the right steps,, first make it illegal ..THEN test for it ….
I say if you do not like the policy then vote them out. If you do not vote then stop complaining.
That’s funny. Most of you are all for drug testing for other substances. What do you think nicotine is? I guess YOUR drug of choice is OK. After all, it doesn’t really hurt anyone else does it? Wait. That’s what the liberals/ libertarians say about the drugs too.
Ha..Ha…. i’m already overworked and under paid …..Please do not stress me out anymore by not allowing me to smoke, just who is it that sits behind there closed office doors and comes up with some of this crap …
rukiddingme, It says TOBACCO FREE.. that includes all tobacco and this only applies if you want to get a job there. If it bothers you, execise your rights and go somewhere else. Remember these are suppose to be the jobs that pay so much and have great benefits remember? not.
This is wonderful! Good job Escambia County School Board.
So teachers you cant smoke but feel free to take your zanex ,zoloft,valume,oxycodone and lortab .I guess you will need a scrip to smoke legaly soon.
Okay, don’t hire anyone who smokes, or has smoked in the last six months. This will lower the cost of insurance for the company and the employee? I don’t think so. Because there is always something else to make it higher. And this also includes the use of the gums or other products that aides in helping to stop or stay off tobacco? All I have to say is IDIOTS.
Next thing you know they’ll only want *blue eyes and blonde hair people*!!
oh wait, that was nazi germany!
Hello Roy, no one is forcing these kids to take a drug test, unless they want to participate in extracurricular activites. I do not remember the stoners being involved with these anyway. I can remember at Jim Allen when the door to the teachers lounge would open and smoke would roll out like #5 diesel. Kids need to learn the skills to prepare them for college and life. I do not see where a students car would be a problem, unless they are going out on lunch hour doobie runs? Let’s get these kids off to a good start, they have the rest of life for everything else.
who cares if they drink, smoke, chew tabacco, as long as they are doing there job and what they do off school campus isn’t affecting the kids they teach. It is there business what they do on their own time. Another reason I homeschool. Its hard enough to get good teachers and now it will be even harder. Smoking and drinking does not make one a bad person or bad teacher. There are plenty of non smoking and drinking people in this world but can you honestly say it makes them have more compassion for people or their jobs.
@huh….for once I agree with you.
That was my thoughts exactly. I am not a smoker, but my personal legal
choices are still no one’s business.
If this is fair to do to the public to cut medical costs, than EVERYONE
including legislators should have to do the same. It also should
be for people over weight. Lets see how many of our fat cat legislators
can pass a weight test.
This IS getting out of hand on adults and their personnal habits THAT
ARE LEGAL.
This is an invasion of our constitutional rights.
“The new tobacco-free policy will not allow anyone to be hired that has used tobacco products within the last six months.”
This is insane , whats next, hiring only people that weigh a certain amount? If you really want healthy people maybe make a law about hiring a certain age/weight. If you are going to discriminate, then go all out
going to be alot of unemployed people over this, who said we live in a free country. what will they make us do next stop drinking soda’s at work.
they should be one for drinking also. too many of these school board people are drinkers,,,,,,,,,,