Eleven large-fleet trucking companies are pushing federal regulators to address a petition to allow hair testing for drugs that the carriers claim is needed to help keep drug-using truck drivers from getting behind the wheel.
The carriers — which include publicly traded truckload operators J.B. Hunt [NASDAQ: JBHT], U.S. Xpress [NYSE: USX], Knight-Swift Transportation [NYSE: KNX] and Schneider National [NYSE: SNDR] — are seeking an exemption from trucking regulations so that they could use hair as well as urine for random drug tests and pre-employment screening.
In a petition filed with the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) last August, the carriers asked that they be allowed to use hair drug test results as part of the required random testing, which currently mandates urine testing, and to allow the release of the results of those tests into the Drug & Alcohol Clearinghouse.
To meet the current requirement of 50% annual random testing of drivers, the carriers would test 25% of drivers using urine testing and 25% hair testing,” according to the petition. The carriers are also asking to be allowed to report positive hair tests gathered during pre-employment screening to the clearinghouse.
Hair testing is more expensive on average than urine testing, costing about $100 per driver versus $45 for a urine test, according to the petition. It points out that several of the 11 carriers have been conducting their own hair testing to screen drivers in addition to the required urine testing for over 10 years.
However, “the big issue is not the cost,” Rob Moseley, an attorney with law firm Moseley Marcinak Law Group, which is representing the carriers, told FreightWaves on Tuesday. He said that because drugs are detectable in hair tests 45 days or longer, as opposed to much shorter periods in urine, drivers abusing drugs are getting hired who might otherwise not have been. “These drug users need to go into the system because we don’t want them driving commercial vehicles on our highways. Right now, they’re evading the system.”
After the FMCSA failed to publish the trucking group’s petition within the 60-day time frame required by statute, Moseley’s firm in February petitioned the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit, based in New Orleans, to compel FMCSA to publish the document.
However, the court denied the group’s petition several days later, ruling that, because some of the trucking companies involved had previously petitioned FMCSA for a similar exemption (in January 2017), “the [FMCSA] Administrator may treat these similar petitions as a single petition” and therefore “she was not required to publish the companies’ second, similar petition.”
Asked to comment, an FMCSA spokesman pointed to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS) proposed rule published in September — a month after the trucking group submitted its petition — setting out mandatory hair test guidelines for agencies that are required to oversee drug testing. HHS has not yet issued a final rule.
“We can’t act until HHS finalizes their process,” the spokesman told FreightWaves, adding that “the agency is aware of the petition, and we will formally be responding to the petitioners.”
The comment period for HHS’ proposed rule ended on Nov. 9. The 213 comments received were notable in that they were almost universally critical of the guidelines as proposed: Those opposing hair testing contended they went too far, those supporting hair testing — including the American Trucking Associations — asserted they did not go far enough.
“FMCSA is taking the position that HHS is going to deal with this,” Moseley said. “But we’re asking for an exemption from FMCSA regulations, not from HHS, so therefore FMCSA is the appropriate agency to consider our petition.”
Besides, he said, “the carriers we represent all opposed the HHS proposal because it requires duplicative testing of both urine and hair. That does nothing to improve [the ability to catch drug abusers] so the guidelines don’t really help.”
Related stories:
Timothy Pickett
picketttim20@gmail.com Well I say that’s not right at all. It’s very well discrimination of personal or private life as my well as violation of amendment rights.what you do after work is your business.as long as you don’t come on clock intoxicated.i say no.
p.S. you have your damn clearing house, It’s that not enough.
Timothy Pickett
picketttim20@gmail.com Well I say that’s not right at all. It’s very well discrimination of personal or private life as my well as violation of amendment rights.what you do after work is your business.as long as you don’t come on clock intoxicated.i say no.
Truckers union boss
The next step is for all drivers to be unionized because this carriers have taken too much advantage of truck drivers… # truck drivers should be unionize and be paid hourly for every time spent out there…
Randy Jordein Brown Sr
I believe that is completely wrong the bear people that actually do not have hair what fall up under this new law and will not get higher because they have no hairlooks like that’s leading towards defamation of character
Gary
Yea these are the same company’s that kill more people in traffic accidents than all owner operator/small trucking companies put together and still have their dot numbers largest employers of non English speaking and English reading non qualified divers in the industry but yet they want regulate everything in this business so they can have and level playing field to steal freight so they can regulate the rates and manipulate the market simple solution don’t work for the ATA members and see where their driver pool comes from they steal from the shippers they steal from the receivers they steal from their drivers and they steal from independents and are still not happy
Truckers union boss
You are right, all drivers should come together to stop this nonsense, example we need hourly pay for every time spent around the truck and unionized.
Shiron Allen
As like the transportation industry is not already one of the most regulated but they keep coming up with different ideas and gestures to either limit the people that can drive or limit the money that you can make it’s always something
Ron
That is crap they will still find away around it they are putting more restrictions on people, people will eventually fight back with all the restrictions laws put on them these big corporations are shooting them selfs in the foot, people running corporations do not know how to run there corporation.
Bee Henderson
This John Gallagher jerk has never ever driven a truck. But is deaf on destroying the trucking industry. I have been a trucker for 40 year’s and I know a jerk when I see one. Trucker’s use to fight back NOW we have so many non English speaking driver’s you can’t explain that it’s time to fight back. When the trucks shut down and there is no food or gas at the gas stations then this fool will be out of a job. Worthless POS
Truckers union boss
💯 right, drivers are so busy individually that the companies are taking advantage of the drivers… unionized and hourly pay for every time spent on the rig is a must
Christopher
Hair Follicle testing is actually very useful weeding out individuals who do Coke and other un prescribed narcotics. I’ve always felt that anyone with a CDL should be required to do a UA and hair follicle test during pre screenings and randoms. The same should be done with certified Welders, equipment operators, and anyone else running or working with any dangerous machinery that requires an individual to be at least 16 to operate.
I wish they would do it for individuals with drivers license as well but that will never happen. At least we can target a larger professional demographic. I’ve worked in construction for over a decade and I can tell you it’s not a huge deal getting the testing but it sure does save lives and weed out individuals slipping by with a pre stored hidden bladder. You cant fake out a double test that includes a hair follicle. Just saying.
Jason Vorhees
They actually make shampoo to pass a hair follicle test. No matter what they do, they will find a way around it.
Renaldo paulin
All these Rules for For truck drivers But yet we can’t get A raise Some drivers have been working for 20 years and still only make $25 an hourThis must change.
Nathan
I will just say hair testing is a very inconsiderate ignorant and foolish practice. I as well as others are well groomed and don’t have significant hair to use for a sample. It is possible due to the lack of hair on my body that when required to take a hair sample test I would not have any to give and therefore would be considered to be refusing to submit a sample and considered for a positive drug test as a result. I do not do drugs and should not be submitted to such stupid test that I can not easily comply to.