Impairment testing remains a key topic in Canada’s trucking industry, with Pulse Reader Survey respondents calling for more accurate and consistent approaches, particularly as cannabis use and cognitive risks continue to challenge conventional policies.
In trucknews.com’s June Pulse Reader Survey, readers rated their concern about cannabis use among commercial drivers since the 2018 legalization in Canada at an average of 73 out of 100.
One respondent wrote: “Too many shops/stores selling products that provide temptations that didn’t exist before.” Another added, “Sad to see alcohol being sold in truck stops, as well as cannabis being sold in stores.”
About one-third of respondents (34.3%) said their companies had adjusted their drug and alcohol policies since 2018. Among the respondents who answered follow-up questions about changes, 17% reported increased random testing, 5% noted a move to third-party testing services, and 35% said their companies have started educating drivers about off-duty cannabis and alcohol use. Still, just over half (50.8%) said no changes have been made at all.
The comments reflect this inconsistency. “Lack of company enforcement is leading to too many impaired drivers on the road, leading to preventable accidents,” one respondent wrote. Others emphasized the need for better driver education, particularly among younger recruits. ” [My concern is] having younger drivers who really don’t understand the long-term effect that drugs and alcohol can have on the body. It does not affect everyone the same way,” one participant noted. “Many young drivers don’t see or understand the dangers.”
Testing methods
When asked about preferred testing methods, 44.4% selected urine tests, while 30.2% preferred much more invasive blood tests, 7.9% chose hair testing, and 17.5% supported oral fluid. But several respondents said urine tests don’t align with real-time impairment detection.
“Urine testing must be thrown out,” one reader wrote. “If you are a regular legal user of cannabis, you may test positive on Monday for use that you did on the weekend. Yet you are not currently impaired on the Monday. Let’s get an oral swab [test] instead of urine.” Another participant said, “Current cannabis testing methods are woefully inadequate. It stays in your system far longer than any impairment and longer than nearly any other commonly tested substance.”
This is, indeed, true.
Last August, Jonathan Davids, corporate medical director of DriverCheck Inc., Canada’s provider of workplace medical testing and assessments, told Trucknews.com that a positive test does not necessarily indicate impairment at the time of testing, leading to potential misconceptions about the results.
“Drug tests are not tests of impairment,” he said. “Just because you have a positive drug test, it doesn’t mean you’re actually impaired at that moment. With the exception of alcohol, we can’t determine impairment from the presence of a drug alone.”
This distinction is particularly relevant for THC – the psychoactive component in marijuana – which can remain in the system long after use and lead to positive test results even when the individual is no longer impaired.
There are different testing methods, and currently, in Canada, urine and oral fluid tests play roles in identifying recent versus past drug use, according to DriverCheck. Davids explained that urine tests, for instance, detect substances over a longer period.
Meanwhile, oral fluid tests – which have been gaining increased popularity – are more effective in identifying recent use, particularly for THC, within the last 12 to 24 hours. Meanwhile, hair testing is not widespread since it detects cannabis use within one to three months, and blood tests are considered too invasive.
Testing frequency
When asked about how often drivers should be tested, most respondents favored multiple points of intervention. Nearly 70% supported random testing several times a year, 51.5% said drivers should be tested upon hiring, while 50% backed post-accident testing. Nearly half (45.5%) also supported testing based on a manager’s reasonable suspicion. Fifteen percent favored scheduled quarterly checks, while 6% opted for post-accident testing only, and 3% were against the tests in general.
But some respondents called for more proactive and standardized approaches. “If we are truly professional this would be standard across Canada. The public roads are supposed to be safe,” one comment read. “I think of my family every day using the public roadways and pray that all companies and employees are being responsible.”
Cognitive impairment
The survey also addressed cognitive impairment unrelated to substance use. While 72% of respondents said they are familiar with the concept, only 20% reported that their companies test for it. One participant wrote: “Cognitive testing is a must moving forward, as we have learned that impairment is simply not held to only drugs and alcohol, especially for the commercial transportation industry!”
Concerns about returning to duty after violations also surfaced. When asked if they or someone they know had been forced out of the industry due to being unable to begin the Return to Duty process in the U.S. Drug and Alcohol Clearinghouse, 24.6% said yes.
But one of the readers stressed the importance of shared responsibility between carriers and drivers. “Drivers should take responsibility and use common sense,” they wrote. “A company can test and train drivers, but it takes effort by both parties.” Another added: “There’s no place in this industry for any substance abuse of any kind. Penalties need to come with stiffer consequences.”
Credit: Source link
