Skip to main content

FWC orders employee to pay the company for fake Drug Test

Toll awarded $18,000 from drug-test faking employee

by Victoria Bruce HC Online

Logistics giant Toll Holdings has scored a win from the Fair Work Commission as a former employee has been ordered to pay the company $18,000 after falsifying drug test results to support an unfair dismissal claim.

The commissioner ordered the former Toll Holdings employee, who was fired in June 2015 after a positive drug test, to pay the company $18,000 in compensation, AFR reported.

The employee had tested positive for amphetamine and methamphetamine in his system after a workplace drug test, yet before his dismissal the worker told Toll urine sample tested by a doctor had showed up negative to the drugs.

But at subsequent proceedings to hear the worker's unfair dismissal claim, the doctor gave evidence that the test had been "manipulated", and the original test showed the former employee had tested positive.
 Read the full article here.

Comment:
It clearly pays to have a drug test with adulterant checks to ensure the sample has not been manipulated in any way.

See our range of Certified Urine Drug Tests with adulterants at MediNat Australia

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

GHB date rape drug is back and pill testing may not help, says ED doctor

GHB the Date Rape Drug Discovered by a Russian chemist in the nineteenth century, used as a general anaesthetic in 1970s Dunedin, picked up by Californian bodybuilders in the 1990s - the drug known as GHB has travelled a long road to its current resurgence in the Australian party scene. On the weekend in Melbourne, more than 20 people were hospitalised after reportedly overdosing at the Electric Parade festival. GHB was blamed - one of the biggest overdoses of the drug since 10 people collapsed outside at a Gold Coast nightclub in 1996. "It's back again," exclaimed Dr David Caldicott, a Canberra-based emergency department doctor who was in Adelaide when GHB hit in the '90s. "I thought we managed to explain to people it was a stupid drug to take. Around Australia there will be emergency doctors everywhere holding their heads in their hands going, 'Oh God!'. "A new generation has started learning the mistakes all over again."

NSW Police overlooked scientific advice about hair sample

NSW Police overlooked scientific advice about hair sample and sacked drug-tested sergeant Eamonn Duff  March 12 2017  A single strand of hair that destroyed the life of a long-serving Sydney police officer has the potential to influence the future of not just the entire NSW Police Force but all workplaces across NSW. Sergeant George Zisopoulos insists he has been wrongly dismissed due to one of his hair follicles which returned a positive drug test reading. But while the state's top cop, Commissioner Andrew Scipione, has determined that, on the "balance of probabilities", the officer knowingly consumed drugs, scientific opinion suggests otherwise. Leading forensic experts have cast doubts over the decision to sack Sergeant Zisopoulos, concluding there is "no evidence" the substances found on his hair were ingested and that the minute readings may have been caused by "external contamination". ergeant Zisopoulos, who is the first NSW

Welfare drug test: the most likely trial sites based on Govt criteria

Wednesday 17 May 2017 11:00am By James Purtill From next January, anyone applying for Newstart or Youth Allowance in one of three as-yet-unnamed areas could be tested for drug use. Not everyone gets tested. Job seekers and students will be profiled to identify the ones most likely to be taking drugs. We don't know what the profiling will be based on, only that it will be "relevant characteristics that indicate a higher risk of substance abuse". That could be anything from age, to income, to gender to school leaving age. But we do know what criteria the government will use to pick the three trial sites: High rates of welfare; High rates of drug use; Available counselling services. That narrows it down a bit. The three trial sites will test 5,000 *new* applicants, so they need to be Centrelink offices with a lot of people walking through the doors. The office with the highest number of payment recipients in December 2016 (the most recent