Iowa Supreme Court Decisions Provide Employers with Drug and Alcohol Testing Guidance

Two recent decisions discuss Iowa's statue governing drug and alcohol testing - Iowa Code Section 730.5 - as it applies to employers.

Private Iowa employers are expected to comply with Section 730.5 when conducting drug and alcohol testing. Section 730.5 imposes several detailed requirements such as testing procedures and written drug and alcohol testing policies, as well as limitations for unannounced drug testing. Iowa Code Section 730.5 may be accessed here.

The Iowa Supreme Court recently decided two cases that provide further guidance on how employers should comply with Section 730.5.

In the first case, Dix v. Casey's General Stores, Inc., the Court addressed the employer's Drug and Alcohol Testing Policy that allowed for unannounced random drug testing for safety sensitive positions. The employer took the position that all jobs in a particular warehouse were "safety-sensitive" and, therefore, subject to unannounced random drug testing. As a result, the employer ended up terminating a group of employees who tested positive for marijuana. The employees alleged that the employer violated Section 730.5.

In addressing the claims, the Court ultimately determined that Section 730.5 requires substantial compliance. An employer shall be compliant as long as it accomplishes the "important objectives expressed by the particular part of Section 730.5 in issue." Here, the question was whether the employer substantially complied with 730.5(8) that permits unannounced, random drug testing for those in a "safety-sensitive position" as defined by subsection (8)(a)(3). The court held that the employer failed to substantially comply with the statute by classifying the entire warehouse as safety sensitive; all of the warehouse positions did not fit into the section 730.5(8) definition of "safety-sensitive position." Instead of classifying based on the job functions, the employer "focused on the environment in which [the] job [was] performed."

The second case, Woods v. Charles Gabus Ford, accompanies the above case and further addresses the substantial compliance standard under a different provision of Section 730.5. Here, an employer terminated an employee who tested positive for methamphetamine after a random drug test. The Court addressed whether the employer substantially complied with section 730.5(7)(j)(1) notice requirements. The employee argued that the employer did not comply because the employer (1) failed to include the specific cost of a retest in the letter and (2) failed to send the letter return receipt requested.

Under the first claim, the Court held that the employer did not substantially comply after failing to include the cost of a retest. The statute requires the employer to provide such information in a notice and, in order to comply, the information "must be consistent with the employer's cost" for a confirmatory test. Without this information, a person does not have "a meaningful opportunity to consider whether to undertake a confirmatory test."

Under the second claim, the Court held that the employer substantially complied even though it did not send the return receipt requested. The statute only requires the employer to convey the importance of the message sent, which the employer successfully did.

Employers are advised to review both Iowa Supreme Court decisions with counsel to ensure they are compliant with Iowa Code Section 730.5.

Posted: July 14, 2021

All Rights Reserved © 2021 Business Information Group, Inc.
This document and/or presentation is provided as a service to our customers. Its contents are designed solely for informational purposes, and should not be inferred or understood as legal advice or binding case law, nor shared with any third parties. Persons in need of legal assistance should seek the advice of competent legal counsel. Although care has been taken in preparation of these materials, we cannot guarantee the accuracy, currency or completeness of the information contained within it. Anyone using this information does so at his or her own risk.

Thank you for your interest in Business Information Group. We have received your message and will contact you in one business day or less.
You have exceeded the number of attempts to submit this form. As a result, your IP address has been temporarily blocked.

Get In Touch

Send a Message *fields required

What are your Interests?optional

Contact Information

Even our RFP PROCESS is state-of-the-art.

Take a look

What our clients are saying

We cannot express enough how much we have enjoyed working with BIG! It has really benefitted our processing and ease of doing business!

Licensing and Registration Manager
Investment and Insurance Company

I enjoy collaborating with BIG, and know that if I have to reach out with a question/concern, a positive attitude with a willingness to find resolve is on the other side of an email or a phone call.

Human Resources Administrator
Global Financial Services Firm

You have been the most professional and most helpful business partner that I have ever been associated with — always there to assist us and with rapid turnaround times.

Principal Consultant
Major Professional Services Network

I am confident whenever we add a product with your company that I will have a good experience.

Division Manager
Insurance and Financial Services Agency

We have received superior service and we know this is what you and your team strive for. We are grateful for the dedication, level of professionalism and effort shown.

Large Insurance Agency

You are leaving

Ok, Continue Cancel