Hard Choices for a Safer, Healthier Workplace

Many scrap recyclers have joined the nationwide challenge to keep the work environment drug- and alcohol-free. But testing and treatment programs can be expensive. Here’s how several recyclers are handling the hard business choices posed by substance abuse.

Among scrap processing and consuming businesses the safety issue is particularly important in light of such federal initiatives as the Department of Transportation (DOT) guidelines for commercial carriers. But most recyclers interviewed for this article say they enacted programs well before the DOT directives, citing the nature of their operations as reason enough to step up safety measures.

In a scrap plant, any degree of impairment invites danger, says Joseph Kovacich a vice president of Miller Compressing Co in Milwaukee. "We have certain operations in which crane operators affect other people. I can guarantee you, I wouldn't want that operator to' be on drugs or even have a hangover if I was the guy [standing] where he was swinging that magnet."

Drugs and alcohol create a host of other problems in addition to safety risks, Kovacich notes. In fact, according to the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), substance abusers cost U.S. employers an estimated $102 billion annually in decreased productivity, increased accidents, absenteeism, medical claims, and employee theft. Also, statistics indicate that health care costs are 300 percent higher for this group. Figures from the Bureau of Labor Statistics offer other troubling specifics: Compared to problem-free employees, substance abusers are four times more likely to have on-the-job accidents, receive three times the amount of sick pay, file five times as many compensation claims, and are absent at a rate of 16 times that of abuse-free employees.

Testing from the Executive Office to the Line

Drug and alcohol problems don't discriminate, says Kovacich; both blue- and white-collar employees may find themselves in trouble. He recalls one of the most pointed examples in recent years: a $19 million error by a major airline's computer operator who had smoked marijuana.

At Miller Compressing, the drug and alcohol policy applies to every one of the company's 300 employees, extending through all levels. Everyone is subject to one-time testing on a random basis, Kovacich says, adding that he wishes the company had instituted an ongoing random-testing, as it has proven to be a very effective deterrent to continued substance abuse. According to some studies, random or discretionary testing can make post-treatment success rates 10 times better.

Another effect of the program and the company's new awareness of substance abuse was the decision to prohibit alcohol consumption during work hours, Kovacich says, referring to sales and marketing functions. "We entertain our customers, but we realized that if we're going to be serious about drug abuse-including legal drugs like alcohol--how can we say our marketing people can drink at lunch? We concluded that they can't."

Comp rehensive Programs

According to Kovacich, a thorough approach to addressing drug and alcohol problems in the workplace extends beyond random testing. Screening for pre-employment and "reasonable-cause" are also needed. Kovacich recommends a number of actions companies can take.

Interview state-certified labs to assess their reliability.

Require that employees notify the company about any prescription drugs they may be taking.

Have in place an employee assistance program (EAP) that can diagnose problems and make referrals for longer-ten-n counseling and treatment program.

Educate the workforce through information sessions about the dangers of drug and alcohol abuse, and be sure to put every point about this company policy and procedure in writing so that it will be available to all.

EAPs and other programs may be costly, says NIDA, but they can save a company money. University of Michigan researchers found that employees who received extended follow-up treatment after completing rehabilitation programs experienced 15 percent fewer relapses than those who didn't receive after-care. Other results included lower disability and health-care payments that saved $3.20 for every dollar the company paid into the program.

Miller pays a percentage of an employee's rehabilitation at one of the country's most successful residential facilities. "We'll pay airfare and the deductible that insurance doesn't pay," Kovacich explains, "because we feel that the program is one of the best around."

Hard Choices and a Hard-Line Approach

Joel Denbo, vice president of Denbo Iron and Metal Co. Inc. in Decatur, Alabama, has taken a hard line against drug and alcohol abuse at his company. Nevertheless, he says that of his 85 employees, 70 percent "were tickled to death" when the company instituted a program for pre-employment, reasonable-cause, and random testing.

For Denbo, the issue is protection-of jobs, employees, customers, and the company. He says that he could not let drug and alcohol problems continue because a rash of accidents was making the workplace unsafe, and workers' compensation costs would have made the company noncompetitive in the scrap business. "I owed it to my good and faithful employees to take those radical steps and eliminate irresponsible employees who'd dare come into an environment like a scrap operation impaired and put a fellow worker at risk."

Denbo makes it clear that his is solely a "termination program," designed to rid the company of drug and alcohol abusers. "If you come up with alcohol or drugs in your system you'll be discharged. We will not have users working for us, period." Initial tests eliminated 30 percent of the workforce, and pre-employment tests have screened out 9 of 10 applicants, he says.

He adds that there are both philosophical and practical reasons for not funding a treatment program: "I did not create the problem so I don't feel I have any obligation to pay for rehabilitation. That would cause a tremendous financial burden. In this state, unlike others, a program for one person would cost our insurance plan up to $22,000 for six weeks. Obviously, it would bankrupt our health insurance plan. It's not that we're so cavalier as to say that human resources are of no value, but it's strictly an economic decision-we cannot afford it. ... I'm not a school, the federal government, or a social program. I'm a business, pursuing business practices to make a profit."

Since the program began more than one Year ago, Denbo says, the company's productivity has risen, accident levels have fallen, and destruction of equipment has dropped. The good results have made him more aware of the value drug screening has in strengthening the American workforce. "Everyone says the country's productivity is down, that we can't compete worldwide," he says. "I think it's a patriotic duty of business to screen employees for alcohol and drugs. It's a method for American business people to use in assisting the nation in waging the war on drugs." Says Denbo, if you put the ability of people to make a living at risk by insisting they work drug- and alcohol-free, you help eliminate substance abuse.

A Company's Best Asset Is the Workforce

Mark Cohen, president of Central Metals CO. in Atlanta, echoes Denbo's assessment of testing. "I can't imagine any responsible company in today's environment not requiring pre-employment testing," he says. And while he agrees that it's not a company's responsibility to provide programs and counseling, he's chosen to do so. "One of the company's assets is its people, and just as we don't hesitate to spend money on a crane that's broken or a machine that needs repair, we think the company has that same responsibility to people," he adds.

Still, treatment costs are significant considerations, particularly when a company must, in fairness, provide the same treatment to new hires as veteran employees. Cohen thinks such expenses are worthwhile for the sake of the life-long worker.

"In our opinion, a man who's been here 25 years has invested most of his life and has certainly benefited the company during his stay or we wouldn't have kept him here that long. He deserves to be treated as something more than a disposable paper clip, and we do treat him as a major asset."

Cohen says plans for the year-old program began after an employee approached him in the plant and remarked that the company could help employees with drug and alcohol problems. At the same time, the company's safety committee released an assessment of plant conditions and recommended a drug and alcohol program for workers in safety-sensitive positions. Cohen then contracted for an EAP to provide counseling and referrals, while gathering legal guidelines on drug testing to avoid "overstepping boundaries." He strongly advises consulting with lawyers on program design.

Central Metals's screening program consists of pre-employment, reasonable-cause, and monthly random testing. Company policy provides a "last chance" to all current employees who test positive. They must sign a last-chance agreement to work with the EAP and participate m a treatment program. Over the next year, the company will test treated employees any number of times at its discretion. Positive results mean automatic termination. "We give them that last chance with the understanding that it is indeed the last chance, because this can go on forever," Cohen says.

Since the program began, Central Metals has dismissed six of its approximately 100 employees. Says Cohen, "We made a statement to people on where we stand with drug use and on where we stand in terms of who they are, making it clear that we'd cheer their successes and mourn if they lost--but they'd be gone nonetheless"

Though some people must be opposed to the program, "no one's voiced anything but support." This may be because the suggestion for a program "came up through the ranks," Cohen explains, adding that "it wasn't force-fed. There's a general recognition by the working population that this problem must be addressed for their own

safety."

Cohen emphasizes the responsibility of a company to take some kind of action: "Our position is that we cannot change the state of the world our people live in or are exposed to. All we want to do is create an environment where [drugs and alcohol] won't be in our workplace. We'll work it out in some program that's not so drastic as to cut our heads off in the process."

After one year, the test failure rate for pre-employment has dropped from 50 to 25 percent, Cohen reports. He says this may be because Central Metals informs applicants in interviews and on prominently displayed notices so as not to waste their or the company's time if they use drugs. And random testing sends a clear message to current employees. "It brings the issue to the surface once a month and let's everyone know [substance abuse] isn't acceptable. For those who have to go in for a screen and may be doing something unacceptable, at least they have to address the issue on a personal level."

Focus on Employee Job Performance

Central Metals's supervisors were trained to identify and address drug and alcohol problems and to make effective use of the EAP. But, says Cohen, "Our supervisors aren't psychologists, sociologists, priests, or rabbis. They're not trained in counseling; they're trained to be professionals in managing a company and getting production out.” For this reason, Central Metals encourages supervisors to make referrals and “not get tied up in an employee’s successes or failures with personal problem.”

Supervisors may approach problem employees on the basis of job performance, Cohen says. “Whether the job performance issue is related to drugs or alcohol, supervisors don’t have to determine. They’ve got the means, if they think there’s a substance abuse problem, to … get that person help.”

Frank Giglia Jr., vice president of Allied Scrap Processors Inc. in Lakeland, Florida, says his company bases its drug and alcohol policy solely on work performance. Allied’s five-year-old testing and referral program when Giglia and his sister became educated about substance abuse while serving on the board of a community program to assist local teenagers.

Well-informed about problems of denial and dependency, Giglia says examining job performance criteria is the most appropriate way for the company to address the issue. “If job performance improves, we have to assume the treatment program worked. If it doesn’t improve, we have to let the employee go and assume the program didn’t work. We let them go because the job didn’t improve.”

The small family-owned company of 30 employees was able to establish an informal program because of its size, says Giglia. “Being small, we don’t need all the rules that larger companies need. And being a family organization, we’re pretty tight-knit. We see everyone who works here everyday. So we don’t really need a bureaucracy.”

Like other companies, Allied uses pre-employment and reasonable-cause testing. Its random tests take place once a year. According to company policy, if an employee who tests positive refuses treatment or tests positive on a post-treatment test, he or she may be terminated. But each case receives individual treatment, says Giglia. "“e do this on an individual basis because everyone is different and we can handle it individually because we have that flexibility. If I had 1,000 employees, I could be flexible.”

Distinguishing between work and personal habits is another aspect of Allied’s commonsense approach. According to Giglia: “Ernest Hemingway was reported to be an alcoholic, but his publishers never turned down his work. If someone comes to work everyday sober and does a great job, are you ever going to fire him? He could be an alcoholic, but you can’t judge on personal habits, just work habits. We’re not there to hunt down people who drink or take drugs. Our job as an employer is to make sure we have a productive, safe workplace. That’s the goal of our program--it’s not an anti-drug campaign.”

His advice to other companies, particularly ones of limited size, is “You’re never too small to have a wellness program, and to refer people. You’re never too small to ask your employee what the problem is.”

Frank Cozzi, secretary/treasurer of Cozzi Iron and Metal Inc. in Chicago, has a comprehensive program for his 300 employees. It consists of pre-employment screening, periodic testing, random-testing, reasonable-cause, and post-accident tests. The testing is complemented by EAP referrals to treatment programs. Though company policy mandates termination if employees who test positive refuse treatment or test positive post-treatment, Cozzi says the program has only been in effect four months and no one has tested positive so far.

In terms of treatment, Cozzi Iron and Metal positions itself as thoroughly employee-oriented. "Pretty much anywhere people think they can get help, we will work with them on that--for counseling and rehabilitation. They can go anywhere in the nation, and their insurance will cover a good portion of it."

The company's supervisors received eight hours of training to recognize and identify problem employees and to learn how to address difficult situations. Cozzi believes this kind of training is important enough to continue. "It's an ongoing process. We're meeting in the future to discuss the issue of giving supervisors additional training because it's pretty traumatic for them to deal with. This is a close-knit group of people, so it's hard to confront friends and coworkers"

Although Cozzi's workforce is comparatively large, he prefers to handle each situation on an individual basis. "We don't categorize people across the board. ... If someone tests positive we want to get to the bottom of why. We're more concerned with rehabilitation than termination. We'll make every reasonable effort to save the employee," he says

A Glimpse at the Future

Despite all the attention to drug and alcohol abuse, both in and out of the workplace, some reports show that the problem remains widespread. NIDA's 1988 National Household Survey of Americans revealed that of 20- to 40-year-old full-time employees, 22 percent used an illicit drug in the previous year, and 13 percent in the previous month.

Work environments, at least, are becoming safer. The number of companies using mandatory testing and referrals has risen from 21 percent in 1987 to 29 percent in 1989, according to a survey conducted by Hay Management Consultants in Washington, D.C. And the firm predicts that number is likely to increase. For safety-sensitive businesses such as scrap operations, the report is good news to employees and employers alike.•

Editor's Note: Scrap Processing and Recycling would like to learn about drug and alcohol testing and treatment programs around the country. Please send information about your program to the magazine at 1627 K Street, NW, Ste. 700, Washington, D.C. 20006-1704.

Many scrap recyclers have joined the nationwide challenge to keep the work environment drug- and alcohol-free. But testing and treatment programs can be expensive. Here’s how several recyclers are handling the hard business choices posed by substance abuse.

Among scrap processing and consuming businesses the safety issue is particularly important in light of such federal initiatives as the Department of Transportation (DOT) guidelines for commercial carriers. But most recyclers interviewed for this article say they enacted programs well before the DOT directives, citing the nature of their operations as reason enough to step up safety measures.

In a scrap plant, any degree of impairment invites danger, says Joseph Kovacich a vice president of Miller Compressing Co in Milwaukee. "We have certain operations in which crane operators affect other people. I can guarantee you, I wouldn't want that operator to' be on drugs or even have a hangover if I was the guy [standing] where he was swinging that magnet."

Drugs and alcohol create a host of other problems in addition to safety risks, Kovacich notes. In fact, according to the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), substance abusers cost U.S. employers an estimated $102 billion annually in decreased productivity, increased accidents, absenteeism, medical claims, and employee theft. Also, statistics indicate that health care costs are 300 percent higher for this group. Figures from the Bureau of Labor Statistics offer other troubling specifics: Compared to problem-free employees, substance abusers are four times more likely to have on-the-job accidents, receive three times the amount of sick pay, file five times as many compensation claims, and are absent at a rate of 16 times that of abuse-free employees.

Testing from the Executive Office to the Line

Drug and alcohol problems don't discriminate, says Kovacich; both blue- and white-collar employees may find themselves in trouble. He recalls one of the most pointed examples in recent years: a $19 million error by a major airline's computer operator who had smoked marijuana.

At Miller Compressing, the drug and alcohol policy applies to every one of the company's 300 employees, extending through all levels. Everyone is subject to one-time testing on a random basis, Kovacich says, adding that he wishes the company had instituted an ongoing random-testing, as it has proven to be a very effective deterrent to continued substance abuse. According to some studies, random or discretionary testing can make post-treatment success rates 10 times better.

Another effect of the program and the company's new awareness of substance abuse was the decision to prohibit alcohol consumption during work hours, Kovacich says, referring to sales and marketing functions. "We entertain our customers, but we realized that if we're going to be serious about drug abuse-including legal drugs like alcohol--how can we say our marketing people can drink at lunch? We concluded that they can't."

Comp rehensive Programs

According to Kovacich, a thorough approach to addressing drug and alcohol problems in the workplace extends beyond random testing. Screening for pre-employment and "reasonable-cause" are also needed. Kovacich recommends a number of actions companies can take.

Interview state-certified labs to assess their reliability.

Require that employees notify the company about any prescription drugs they may be taking.

Have in place an employee assistance program (EAP) that can diagnose problems and make referrals for longer-ten-n counseling and treatment program.

Educate the workforce through information sessions about the dangers of drug and alcohol abuse, and be sure to put every point about this company policy and procedure in writing so that it will be available to all.

EAPs and other programs may be costly, says NIDA, but they can save a company money. University of Michigan researchers found that employees who received extended follow-up treatment after completing rehabilitation programs experienced 15 percent fewer relapses than those who didn't receive after-care. Other results included lower disability and health-care payments that saved $3.20 for every dollar the company paid into the program.

Miller pays a percentage of an employee's rehabilitation at one of the country's most successful residential facilities. "We'll pay airfare and the deductible that insurance doesn't pay," Kovacich explains, "because we feel that the program is one of the best around."

Hard Choices and a Hard-Line Approach

Joel Denbo, vice president of Denbo Iron and Metal Co. Inc. in Decatur, Alabama, has taken a hard line against drug and alcohol abuse at his company. Nevertheless, he says that of his 85 employees, 70 percent "were tickled to death" when the company instituted a program for pre-employment, reasonable-cause, and random testing.

For Denbo, the issue is protection-of jobs, employees, customers, and the company. He says that he could not let drug and alcohol problems continue because a rash of accidents was making the workplace unsafe, and workers' compensation costs would have made the company noncompetitive in the scrap business. "I owed it to my good and faithful employees to take those radical steps and eliminate irresponsible employees who'd dare come into an environment like a scrap operation impaired and put a fellow worker at risk."

Denbo makes it clear that his is solely a "termination program," designed to rid the company of drug and alcohol abusers. "If you come up with alcohol or drugs in your system you'll be discharged. We will not have users working for us, period." Initial tests eliminated 30 percent of the workforce, and pre-employment tests have screened out 9 of 10 applicants, he says.

He adds that there are both philosophical and practical reasons for not funding a treatment program: "I did not create the problem so I don't feel I have any obligation to pay for rehabilitation. That would cause a tremendous financial burden. In this state, unlike others, a program for one person would cost our insurance plan up to $22,000 for six weeks. Obviously, it would bankrupt our health insurance plan. It's not that we're so cavalier as to say that human resources are of no value, but it's strictly an economic decision-we cannot afford it. ... I'm not a school, the federal government, or a social program. I'm a business, pursuing business practices to make a profit."

Since the program began more than one Year ago, Denbo says, the company's productivity has risen, accident levels have fallen, and destruction of equipment has dropped. The good results have made him more aware of the value drug screening has in strengthening the American workforce. "Everyone says the country's productivity is down, that we can't compete worldwide," he says. "I think it's a patriotic duty of business to screen employees for alcohol and drugs. It's a method for American business people to use in assisting the nation in waging the war on drugs." Says Denbo, if you put the ability of people to make a living at risk by insisting they work drug- and alcohol-free, you help eliminate substance abuse.

A Company's Best Asset Is the Workforce

Mark Cohen, president of Central Metals CO. in Atlanta, echoes Denbo's assessment of testing. "I can't imagine any responsible company in today's environment not requiring pre-employment testing," he says. And while he agrees that it's not a company's responsibility to provide programs and counseling, he's chosen to do so. "One of the company's assets is its people, and just as we don't hesitate to spend money on a crane that's broken or a machine that needs repair, we think the company has that same responsibility to people," he adds.

Still, treatment costs are significant considerations, particularly when a company must, in fairness, provide the same treatment to new hires as veteran employees. Cohen thinks such expenses are worthwhile for the sake of the life-long worker.

"In our opinion, a man who's been here 25 years has invested most of his life and has certainly benefited the company during his stay or we wouldn't have kept him here that long. He deserves to be treated as something more than a disposable paper clip, and we do treat him as a major asset."

Cohen says plans for the year-old program began after an employee approached him in the plant and remarked that the company could help employees with drug and alcohol problems. At the same time, the company's safety committee released an assessment of plant conditions and recommended a drug and alcohol program for workers in safety-sensitive positions. Cohen then contracted for an EAP to provide counseling and referrals, while gathering legal guidelines on drug testing to avoid "overstepping boundaries." He strongly advises consulting with lawyers on program design.

Central Metals's screening program consists of pre-employment, reasonable-cause, and monthly random testing. Company policy provides a "last chance" to all current employees who test positive. They must sign a last-chance agreement to work with the EAP and participate m a treatment program. Over the next year, the company will test treated employees any number of times at its discretion. Positive results mean automatic termination. "We give them that last chance with the understanding that it is indeed the last chance, because this can go on forever," Cohen says.

Since the program began, Central Metals has dismissed six of its approximately 100 employees. Says Cohen, "We made a statement to people on where we stand with drug use and on where we stand in terms of who they are, making it clear that we'd cheer their successes and mourn if they lost--but they'd be gone nonetheless"

Though some people must be opposed to the program, "no one's voiced anything but support." This may be because the suggestion for a program "came up through the ranks," Cohen explains, adding that "it wasn't force-fed. There's a general recognition by the working population that this problem must be addressed for their own

safety."

Cohen emphasizes the responsibility of a company to take some kind of action: "Our position is that we cannot change the state of the world our people live in or are exposed to. All we want to do is create an environment where [drugs and alcohol] won't be in our workplace. We'll work it out in some program that's not so drastic as to cut our heads off in the process."

After one year, the test failure rate for pre-employment has dropped from 50 to 25 percent, Cohen reports. He says this may be because Central Metals informs applicants in interviews and on prominently displayed notices so as not to waste their or the company's time if they use drugs. And random testing sends a clear message to current employees. "It brings the issue to the surface once a month and let's everyone know [substance abuse] isn't acceptable. For those who have to go in for a screen and may be doing something unacceptable, at least they have to address the issue on a personal level."

Focus on Employee Job Performance

Central Metals's supervisors were trained to identify and address drug and alcohol problems and to make effective use of the EAP. But, says Cohen, "Our supervisors aren't psychologists, sociologists, priests, or rabbis. They're not trained in counseling; they're trained to be professionals in managing a company and getting production out.” For this reason, Central Metals encourages supervisors to make referrals and “not get tied up in an employee’s successes or failures with personal problem.”

Supervisors may approach problem employees on the basis of job performance, Cohen says. “Whether the job performance issue is related to drugs or alcohol, supervisors don’t have to determine. They’ve got the means, if they think there’s a substance abuse problem, to … get that person help.”

Frank Giglia Jr., vice president of Allied Scrap Processors Inc. in Lakeland, Florida, says his company bases its drug and alcohol policy solely on work performance. Allied’s five-year-old testing and referral program when Giglia and his sister became educated about substance abuse while serving on the board of a community program to assist local teenagers.

Well-informed about problems of denial and dependency, Giglia says examining job performance criteria is the most appropriate way for the company to address the issue. “If job performance improves, we have to assume the treatment program worked. If it doesn’t improve, we have to let the employee go and assume the program didn’t work. We let them go because the job didn’t improve.”

The small family-owned company of 30 employees was able to establish an informal program because of its size, says Giglia. “Being small, we don’t need all the rules that larger companies need. And being a family organization, we’re pretty tight-knit. We see everyone who works here everyday. So we don’t really need a bureaucracy.”

Like other companies, Allied uses pre-employment and reasonable-cause testing. Its random tests take place once a year. According to company policy, if an employee who tests positive refuses treatment or tests positive on a post-treatment test, he or she may be terminated. But each case receives individual treatment, says Giglia. "“e do this on an individual basis because everyone is different and we can handle it individually because we have that flexibility. If I had 1,000 employees, I could be flexible.”

Distinguishing between work and personal habits is another aspect of Allied’s commonsense approach. According to Giglia: “Ernest Hemingway was reported to be an alcoholic, but his publishers never turned down his work. If someone comes to work everyday sober and does a great job, are you ever going to fire him? He could be an alcoholic, but you can’t judge on personal habits, just work habits. We’re not there to hunt down people who drink or take drugs. Our job as an employer is to make sure we have a productive, safe workplace. That’s the goal of our program--it’s not an anti-drug campaign.”

His advice to other companies, particularly ones of limited size, is “You’re never too small to have a wellness program, and to refer people. You’re never too small to ask your employee what the problem is.”

Frank Cozzi, secretary/treasurer of Cozzi Iron and Metal Inc. in Chicago, has a comprehensive program for his 300 employees. It consists of pre-employment screening, periodic testing, random-testing, reasonable-cause, and post-accident tests. The testing is complemented by EAP referrals to treatment programs. Though company policy mandates termination if employees who test positive refuse treatment or test positive post-treatment, Cozzi says the program has only been in effect four months and no one has tested positive so far.

In terms of treatment, Cozzi Iron and Metal positions itself as thoroughly employee-oriented. "Pretty much anywhere people think they can get help, we will work with them on that--for counseling and rehabilitation. They can go anywhere in the nation, and their insurance will cover a good portion of it."

The company's supervisors received eight hours of training to recognize and identify problem employees and to learn how to address difficult situations. Cozzi believes this kind of training is important enough to continue. "It's an ongoing process. We're meeting in the future to discuss the issue of giving supervisors additional training because it's pretty traumatic for them to deal with. This is a close-knit group of people, so it's hard to confront friends and coworkers"

Although Cozzi's workforce is comparatively large, he prefers to handle each situation on an individual basis. "We don't categorize people across the board. ... If someone tests positive we want to get to the bottom of why. We're more concerned with rehabilitation than termination. We'll make every reasonable effort to save the employee," he says

A Glimpse at the Future

Despite all the attention to drug and alcohol abuse, both in and out of the workplace, some reports show that the problem remains widespread. NIDA's 1988 National Household Survey of Americans revealed that of 20- to 40-year-old full-time employees, 22 percent used an illicit drug in the previous year, and 13 percent in the previous month.

Work environments, at least, are becoming safer. The number of companies using mandatory testing and referrals has risen from 21 percent in 1987 to 29 percent in 1989, according to a survey conducted by Hay Management Consultants in Washington, D.C. And the firm predicts that number is likely to increase. For safety-sensitive businesses such as scrap operations, the report is good news to employees and employers alike.•

Editor's Note: Scrap Processing and Recycling would like to learn about drug and alcohol testing and treatment programs around the country. Please send information about your program to the magazine at 1627 K Street, NW, Ste. 700, Washington, D.C. 20006-1704.