Browse
Search
ORD-2003-036 - Personnel Ordinance Revision - Drug and Alcohol Testing
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
Ordinances
>
Ordinance 2000-2009
>
2003
>
ORD-2003-036 - Personnel Ordinance Revision - Drug and Alcohol Testing
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/29/2013 12:57:30 PM
Creation date
8/2/2011 10:11:26 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
6/17/2003
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Ordinance
Agenda Item
9b
Document Relationships
Agenda - 06-17-2003-9b
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\2000's\2003\Agenda - 06-17-2003
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
24
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
b. Personnel Ordinance Revision — Drug and Alcohol Testing <br />The Board received a report on possible revisions to the Orange County Personnel <br />Ordinance to update the policy covering employee drug and alcohol testing and to implement <br />the Board's direction as to handling positive drug and alcohol tests. <br />Personnel Director Elaine Holmes said that the purpose of this item is to consider <br />revisions to the County's personnel ordinance covering drug and alcohol testing, and to receive <br />any comment or direction from the Board. Because the County is a federal contractor, it is <br />covered by the Drug Free Workplace Act of 1988, which requires that the County maintain a <br />drug free workplace. The County is also covered by the Transportation Employee Testing Act <br />of 1991. She gave reasons the County has a drug free workplace policy. The County's written <br />policy gives advance notice to employees of the policy and the drug and alcohol testing <br />requirements. There are also strict guidelines for the administration of the test. The revision of <br />the policy is a result of a request from the Board of County Commissioners to look at positive <br />alcohol tests the same as for a positive drug test; and also that dismissal not be the only option. <br />The other reason is to reflect updated federal regulations covering transportation related <br />functions. As written, the policy provides the same handling for a positive alcohol test as for a <br />positive drug test. In the case of a positive test, it provides that the employee is subject to <br />disciplinary action, which may include dismissal, under the discretion of the Manager. If the <br />employee were allowed to stay, it would be done under the terms of a written Return to Duty <br />Agreement. The employee will be dismissed if a follow -up test is positive. <br />Commissioner Jacobs asked how the County treated medical records and who could <br />request them. Elaine Holmes said that medical records are kept separately and in a locked <br />location, only accessible by certain employees. <br />John Link said that the County does not keep medical records on any employee. It <br />would be a rare occasion to have a medical record in a personnel file. <br />Commissioner Jacobs made reference to page 16 - 11.10.7 and read, "Records will <br />be released if requested by a federal, state, or local safety agency with regulatory authority over <br />Orange County or any of its employees." He said that this seems inclusive and vague at the <br />same time. Elaine Holmes said that this is a requirement under NCDOT. She cannot recall <br />such a request in the past, but it is a requirement. She would consult with the County Attorney <br />before giving this type of information. <br />Commissioner Gordon made reference to page 13 and said that the waiting period <br />has been completely eliminated. She asked why there was not some waiting period. Elaine <br />Holmes said that they eliminated this because of the Americans with Disabilities Act that the <br />County cannot create a barrier to employment because of past alcoholism or drug abuse. <br />A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis <br />to adopt the draft policy with a July 1, 2003 effective date. <br />VOTE:; UNANIMOUS <br />c. Outdoor Lightina Standards <br />The Board considered closing the Public Hearing and making a decision regarding <br />the adoption of the Outdoor Lighting Standards amendment to the Zoning Ordinance. <br />Planning Director Craig Benedict said that this amendment would enable the County <br />to have standards for new development for lighting in the County. There were many comments <br />at the public hearing. There were three areas that were difficult to consider in the administration <br />recommendation. These areas had to do with requiring amortization for existing single - family <br />homes; holiday decorations (Planning Board recommends setting time limits on holiday lights); <br />and another amortization system for existing commercial, industrial, churches, and <br />governmental buildings. They propose not having it in the ordinance at this time, but just <br />beginning a public education campaign for residential and non - residential existing properties to <br />discuss the benefits of changing the lights out over a period of time. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.