Details of the limits are available at https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/drug-driving#table-of-drugs-and-limits.

TUC guidance for safety reps on drug testing at work is available on its website (https://www.tuc.org.uk/sites/default/files/DrugTestingintheWorkplace.pdf).

LRD, Drug and alcohol policies at work — a guide for union reps (www.lrdpublications.org.uk/publications.php?pub=BK&iss=1893)


Prison workers and “spice”


In May 2018, the Royal College of Nurses (RCN) union said its members working in prisons were suffering the effects of inhaling the psychoactive drug known as “spice” for hours following exposure, with some unable to drive home after their shifts. In at least one case, it said, a nurse was taken to A&E by ambulance after being knocked unconscious by the psychoactive fumes. 


It says the use of psychoactive substances is widespread in UK prisons, and the situation has become so dangerous that one NHS Trust withdrew nursing staff from a prison in County Durham due to the risk.


The union says existing HM Prison & Probation Service (HMPPS) guidance “conflates the chronic and longer-term issues of exposure to second-hand tobacco smoke with the serious and acute issue of exposure to psychoactive substances.” It also suggests there is a duty for nurses and health care assistants “to intervene to protect a prisoner in danger of immediate harm in a cell where smoke or fumes has not yet cleared”.


The RCN says this runs contrary to Resuscitation Council guidance to emergency responders to assess dangerous situations and ensure their own safety before treating casualties.


Nurses say they are worried about driving in case it is not safe, or they get stopped and they fail a drugs test.


At a June 2018 meeting, HMPSS chief executive officer Michael Spurr agreed to work with unions to update the guidance.


Falsely accused bus driver wins compensation



A bus driver falsely accused of driving under the influence of cocaine won compensation for unfair dismissal after he was wrongly dismissed from First Bristol Ltd for “gross misconduct”, having tested positive for cocaine in a workplace drug test.



General union Unite member Alan Bailes had handled several hundred pounds of cash, which research shows is commonly contaminated with cocaine. First Bristol used saliva tests on its employees to identify whether they had consumed illegal substances. But Bailes was not invited to wash his hands before the drug test and had to handle the swabs used to collect his saliva sample both before and after. The fact that he had eaten his sandwiches just before the test increased the chance of hand-to-mouth contamination.



There is no national standard or government-endorsed cut-off level for saliva testing and, as a result, it is sometimes considered unreliable, particularly when compared with urine or hair testing, which is regularly accepted by the courts.



At his personal expense, Bailes provided a hair specimen covering a history of 90 days and the result was negative for cocaine and its metabolites. Despite this new independent evidence, First Bristol refused to reinstate Mr Bailes, who had no previous disciplinary record in his 22-year career history.


An employment tribunal ruled that Bailes should receive the maximum compensation that could be awarded for his unfair dismissal. It entirely accepted that his future career prospects had been affected by the unfair dismissal, and that there was an onus on the employer to carry out proper investigations before dismissing such a long-serving employee with an impeccable record.