Advanced

Är en tillförlitlig testmetod viktig? Spelar drogtestets tillförlitlighet någon roll för att det ska vara tillåtet att genomföra?

Thögersen, Maria LU (2011) HARH16 20112
Department of Business Law
Abstract (Swedish)
Arbetsdomstolen har aldrig prövat metodens tillförlitlighet av drogtester och dess betydelse för ett genomförande. När arbetsdomstolen tar ställning till en arbetstagares vägran att underkasta sig ett drogtest görs en avvägning. I avvägningen ställs arbetsgivarens intresse mot individens rätt till sin integritet. Omständigheter som beaktas är bla syftet med testet och testmetoden.
Drogtestets tillförlitlighet prövades i bl a AD 1998:97, hädanefter Oskarhamnsmålet. Arbetsdomstolen bedömde det osäkra alkoholtestet som allt för integritetskänsligt. Arbetstagaren ansågs därför inte skyldig att delta i alkoholtestet. Argumentet för att genomföra ett drogtest förstärks om man betraktas vara en högriskarbetsgivare. När höga säkerhetsrisker... (More)
Arbetsdomstolen har aldrig prövat metodens tillförlitlighet av drogtester och dess betydelse för ett genomförande. När arbetsdomstolen tar ställning till en arbetstagares vägran att underkasta sig ett drogtest görs en avvägning. I avvägningen ställs arbetsgivarens intresse mot individens rätt till sin integritet. Omständigheter som beaktas är bla syftet med testet och testmetoden.
Drogtestets tillförlitlighet prövades i bl a AD 1998:97, hädanefter Oskarhamnsmålet. Arbetsdomstolen bedömde det osäkra alkoholtestet som allt för integritetskänsligt. Arbetstagaren ansågs därför inte skyldig att delta i alkoholtestet. Argumentet för att genomföra ett drogtest förstärks om man betraktas vara en högriskarbetsgivare. När höga säkerhetsrisker föreligger på en arbetsplats, som i de här fallen, menar doktrinen att ett mindre säkert test kan accepteras.
Socialstyrelsen och Swedac är de kontrollorgan som föreskriver vilka krav som ska ställas på drogtester i arbetslivet. De erkänner endast urinprovtagning som en tillförlitlig metod. Socialstyrelsen menar att narkotikatestning i kontrollsyfte på arbetsplatser ska omfattas av Swedacs ackrediteringssystem. Swedac ställer upp särskilda krav för arbetsplatstestning där det ställs skärpta krav på tillförlitlighet, bla att ”chain-of-custody ska tillämpas.
Det finns inte mycket skrivet i doktrinen om drogtesters tillförlitlighet och av det skälet har intervjuer med experter på drogtester och tillämpare av drogtester genomförts. Det råder mellan dessa en delad uppfattning om synen på tillförlitlighet. Experter förklarar att den enda tillförlitliga metoden för arbetslivet är urinprovtagning. Metoden är ackrediterad. Salivtest är inte ackrediterat i Sverige, men används av tillämparna. De förklarar att salivtestet är ackrediterat i Storbritannien.
I uppsatsen konstateras det att en tillförlitlig metod ska mäta det som detekteras. Risken för falska negativa respektive falska positiva resultat ska elimineras. Arbetsdomstolen ger ingen samlad bild om vad som ska betraktas som ett tillförlitligt drogtest och dess roll i en avvägning. Ett grundläggande krav på ackreditering skulle därför vara önskvärt för att ett drogtest ska få räknas som tillförlitligt. Ett mindre säkert test kan accepteras om det krävs för att undanröja höga risker. Finns kollektivavtal på arbetsplatsen kan ett tolkningsföreträde skydda individen vid en vägran av att underkasta sig ett osäkert test. (Less)
Abstract
The reliability of drug tests and its significance when it comes to the employee´s obligation to take part in a drug test has never been put to trial in the Swedish Labour Court. An adjustment is made as the Labour Court comes to a decision regarding an employee’s refusal to comply to a drug test. In the adjustment the integrity of the individual is put against the employer’s interest. Circumstances the Labour Court takes into consideration are inter alia the purpose of the test end the method used.

The reliability of the drug test was put to trial, inter alia in AD 1998:97, from now on Oskarhamnsmålet. The Labour Court regarded the alcohol test as too sensitive concerning the integrity. The employee was therefore not obliged to... (More)
The reliability of drug tests and its significance when it comes to the employee´s obligation to take part in a drug test has never been put to trial in the Swedish Labour Court. An adjustment is made as the Labour Court comes to a decision regarding an employee’s refusal to comply to a drug test. In the adjustment the integrity of the individual is put against the employer’s interest. Circumstances the Labour Court takes into consideration are inter alia the purpose of the test end the method used.

The reliability of the drug test was put to trial, inter alia in AD 1998:97, from now on Oskarhamnsmålet. The Labour Court regarded the alcohol test as too sensitive concerning the integrity. The employee was therefore not obliged to undergo the drug test. When the employer is considered a “large risk employer” the argument to carry out a drug test is strengthened. When risks are associated with place of work a less reliable test can be accepted the doctrine states.

Socialstyrelsen and Swedac are the public authorities who lay down criteria of drug testing in working life. They only acknowledge urine testing as a safe method. Socialstyrelsen is of the opinion that drug testing must be comprised by the accreditation system of Swedac. Swedac has specific demands for work place drug testing and high demands concerning the reliability, inter alia applying chain-of-custody.

There is not much to be found in the doctrine regarding the reliability of drug tests and for that reason interviews have been carried out with experts in the field and suppliers of drug tests. The opinions differ when it comes to the view of reliability in drug tests. Experts mean that urine testing is the only safe method for work place drug testing. The method enjoys accreditation. Oral fluid test is used by the suppliers of drug tests. The suppliers explain that the method used enjoys accreditation in Great Britain.

In the essay it is established that a reliable method measures what it is supposed to measure. The risk of false negative results and false positive results must be eliminated. The Labour Court does not present a coherent picture of what is to be regarded as a safe drug test and its significance in the adjustment. A fundamental claim of accreditation could therefore be eligible to be able to consider a drug test as reliable. A less safe test can be accepted if high risks are at stake. If a collective agreement is signed a prerogative can act as a defence if an employee declines a drug test. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Thögersen, Maria LU
supervisor
organization
course
HARH16 20112
year
type
M2 - Bachelor Degree
subject
keywords
drogtest, tillförlitlighet, avvägning, salivtest, högriskarbetsgivare och ackreditering drug test, reliability, adjustment, oral fluid test, high risk employer and accreditation
language
Swedish
id
2204360
date added to LUP
2011-11-15 10:05:22
date last changed
2011-11-15 10:05:22
@misc{2204360,
  abstract     = {The reliability of drug tests and its significance when it comes to the employee´s obligation to take part in a drug test has never been put to trial in the Swedish Labour Court. An adjustment is made as the Labour Court comes to a decision regarding an employee’s refusal to comply to a drug test. In the adjustment the integrity of the individual is put against the employer’s interest. Circumstances the Labour Court takes into consideration are inter alia the purpose of the test end the method used. 

The reliability of the drug test was put to trial, inter alia in AD 1998:97, from now on Oskarhamnsmålet. The Labour Court regarded the alcohol test as too sensitive concerning the integrity. The employee was therefore not obliged to undergo the drug test. When the employer is considered a “large risk employer” the argument to carry out a drug test is strengthened. When risks are associated with place of work a less reliable test can be accepted the doctrine states.

Socialstyrelsen and Swedac are the public authorities who lay down criteria of drug testing in working life. They only acknowledge urine testing as a safe method. Socialstyrelsen is of the opinion that drug testing must be comprised by the accreditation system of Swedac. Swedac has specific demands for work place drug testing and high demands concerning the reliability, inter alia applying chain-of-custody.

There is not much to be found in the doctrine regarding the reliability of drug tests and for that reason interviews have been carried out with experts in the field and suppliers of drug tests. The opinions differ when it comes to the view of reliability in drug tests. Experts mean that urine testing is the only safe method for work place drug testing. The method enjoys accreditation. Oral fluid test is used by the suppliers of drug tests. The suppliers explain that the method used enjoys accreditation in Great Britain.

In the essay it is established that a reliable method measures what it is supposed to measure. The risk of false negative results and false positive results must be eliminated. The Labour Court does not present a coherent picture of what is to be regarded as a safe drug test and its significance in the adjustment. A fundamental claim of accreditation could therefore be eligible to be able to consider a drug test as reliable. A less safe test can be accepted if high risks are at stake. If a collective agreement is signed a prerogative can act as a defence if an employee declines a drug test.},
  author       = {Thögersen, Maria},
  keyword      = {drogtest,tillförlitlighet,avvägning,salivtest,högriskarbetsgivare och ackreditering

drug test,reliability,adjustment,oral fluid test,high risk employer and accreditation},
  language     = {swe},
  note         = {Student Paper},
  title        = {Är en tillförlitlig testmetod viktig? Spelar drogtestets tillförlitlighet någon roll för att det ska vara tillåtet att genomföra?},
  year         = {2011},
}