Trucking Alliance calls hair testing opposition ‘disappointing’; OOIDA president responds

The debate over the proposed inclusion of positive hair testing results in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration’s Drug and Alcohol Clearinghouse has reached a new level of contention.

On Aug. 24, the Trucking Alliance asked FMCSA to amend regulations to allow hair testing results to be included in the Clearinghouse. Under the proposed amendment, carriers with knowledge of a positive hair test would be required to report the results to the Clearinghouse.

A 30-day comment period was given to the proposal. During that time, several trucking organizations – including the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association – filed comments opposing the amendment.

“The Clearinghouse should not accept the results of any hair follicle testing, considering the inconsistencies and inaccuracies involved,” OOIDA wrote in comments signed by President Todd Spencer.

Additionally, the Sikh Coalition and the North American Punjabi Trucking Association have voiced their opposition, citing faith-based concerns regarding the removal of hair.

While a number of concerns have been expressed about the validity and accuracy of hair testing, the Trucking Alliance recently doubled down on its support of it.

On Oct. 11, the Alliance published results from a recent survey of truck driver drug tests at seven U.S. trucking companies that are members of the Trucking Alliance. In their report, the alliance concluded the “survey suggests that truck drivers are using illegal drugs in dramatically higher numbers than U.S. DOT reports.”

The survey examined new hire drug testing results from 88,021 drivers who applied for jobs at the seven trucking companies in 2021. The drivers were asked to take two pre-employment drug tests – the U.S. DOT required urinalysis and a hair drug test requested by the companies. Of the applicants, 403 drivers were disqualified for employment due to a positive result from urinalysis. However, hair testing uncovered 4,362 positive tests, a staggeringly wide difference from the positives from urine testing.

“The companies disqualified them, but U.S. DOT’s Clearinghouse doesn’t accept hair test results,” the Trucking Alliance said in their release. “Those drivers went undiscovered, likely found truck driving jobs elsewhere, and resumed their illegal drug habit.”

Based on the results of the survey, the Trucking Alliance concluded that “thousands of licensed commercial truck drivers are deceiving the U.S. government about their illegal drug use. These drivers get away with using cocaine, cannabis, opioids (and) heroin, and drive 80,000-pound tractor trailers, a deadly mix that risks the safety of millions of motorists and they are invisible to the U.S. Department of Transportation.”

In addition to using the survey to support their case for FMCSA to include hair testing in the Clearinghouse, the Trucking Alliance also used the release of the survey as an opportunity to fire back at those groups who oppose the amendment.

“It’s disappointing to see industry groups use outdated reasons to question hair testing, especially when they would only protect drug offenders,” Lane Kidd, managing director for the Trucking Alliance, said in a statement. “On this issue, those groups are long on opinion but short on fact.”

The Trucking Alliance contends that the alternative drug screening method is scientific, reliable, and accurate, noting that 13 states recognize the drug testing method in statute for legal purposes. However, OOIDA has cited a number of concerns regarding hair testing. The Association contends the reliability of drug testing method could be questioned due to variances in hair types, contamination from the environment, and the interference of cosmetic treatment on the analysis of hair.

“The Alliance claims those who disagree with their position are avoiding the facts when discussing hair testing. Yet they consistently and knowingly dodge the reality that HHS has still not finalized federal testing standards that must be used to shape DOT policies,” OOIDA President Todd Spencer told Land Line. “Instead, they believe the shoddy research conducted on behalf of their members is suitable and sufficient for altering policies that will likely affect the entire trucking industry.”

Tom Weakley is the director of operations for the OOIDA Foundation. He and his staff have kept a close eye on the possible inclusion of hair testing results for drivers.

Weakley says the Trucking Alliance’s opinion of hair testing isn’t shared by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration – a division of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

“SAMSHA has found that hair testing could adversely affect drivers because it lacks scientifically-based protocols, thereby purporting false information. For years, the agency and other nationally recognized research agencies have carefully examined hair testing.  They have concluded that there is no standard protocol for hair testing, nor is there any reliable or valid research that has tested hair samples while utilizing SAMSHA’s proposed guidelines.”

Weakly adds that there is no legislative mandate requiring commercial truck drivers to undergo hair testing. Instead, federal law required SAMHSA – in coordination with other federal agencies – to report its progress to Congress in developing guidelines that might potentially address using it.

On Sept. 8, 2020, HHS announced proposed guidelines for the inclusion of hair specimens in the Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs. At that time, the department proposed that fleets who elect to use hair testing also submit a drug test using at least one other federally approved testing medium – either urine or spit. According to the agency, the proposed double-testing requirement was put into place for multiple reasons, including:

“The alternate specimen is used in the event that a donor is unable to provide a sufficient amount of hair for faith-based or medical reasons, or due to an insufficient amount or length of hair.”
Hair testing’s accuracy may be limited by “environmental contamination, the impact of natural hair color on drug incorporation, and the effects of hygiene and cosmetic hair treatments.”
Because of the “limitations of hair testing,” any actions taken based on the screening method alone “may be vulnerable to legal challenge.”

Despite a lack of support from the agency involved in determining the potential use of hair testing, the Trucking Alliance has remained steadfast in its belief that it is a more reliable form of screening.

“Opponents will allege that hair tests often yield false positive results,” Kidd said in a statement. “But since 2017, Trucking Alliance carriers have disqualified 21,989 licensed truck drivers who failed a hair test. Yet none of those 21,989 drivers filed legal action to claim the hair test got it wrong, so false positives would seem to occur almost never.”

OOIDA contends that there are a number of other possible reasons for the lack of legal recourse from drivers. One suggestion is that drivers who failed a hair test at one employer may have applied at another company that didn’t require a pre-employment hair test and never pursued legal action against the false positive. Furthermore, because drivers know that the results will not be reported, most are likely to not spend the money on an attorney to take care of a matter that ultimately won’t impact their future employment options.

“This is a stunningly preposterous conclusion, and reinforces the fact Alliance members and the research they shamelessly tout should not be taken seriously on this matter,” Spencer said. LL