Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 02 APRIL 2015

A Sniff Too Far? Arbitrator Rules Employer Cannot Conduct Random Drug Searches Using Drug Sniffing Dogs

Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
Contributor
Borden Ladner Gervais LLP

Borden Ladner Gervais LLP

With over 750 lawyers, intellectual property agents and other professionals, BLG services...

View firm profile
Explore more from Borden Ladner Gervais LLP

The arbitrator's decision is consistent with prior jurisprudence and the case law which places a very high evidentiary bar on employee drug testing.

CanadaPrivacy

United Steelworkers Local 7552 v. Agrium Vanscoy Potash Operations (Grievance 16-10, Random Drug Searches/Interviews) [2015] S.L.A.A. No. 1. January 5, 2015

A Saskatchewan labour arbitrator, Ken Norman, was required to determine whether Agrium Vanscoy Potash Operations ("Agrium") could require employees to submit to a search from a drug sniffing dog before they could enter the potash mine.  The policy was introduced in 2010 after two items of drug paraphernalia were found in common areas of the mine frequented by unionized employees and independent contractors.

Agrium introduced a random drug search/interview process in the fall of 2010. Since that time, employees and contractors had to submit to a sniff from a drug sniffing dog prior to entering the mine site on randomly selected days each month. In order to perform the search, the dog does not need to touch the employee or the belongings. At most, the dog takes six seconds to complete the search.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from