Railway Worker Sacked for Drinking 'Herbal Tea'

[ComUtoR]

Before drug and alcohol testing you now declare whether you may have eaten a poppy seeded or even just seeded bread products, in case it produces a positive result.

I've been involved in a few DA tests (as a witness) and none have been asked about poppy seeds, bread products, or anything related. I'm sure each TOC/Company has its own testing procedures.

 

[Baxenden Bank]

I hope they weren't dismissed for it !!

The story I recall (from the national press probably) was that the individual couldn't understand why they had failed the test and only after some time / thought was it realised that the poppy seeds on a vienna roll were the cause of the failed test. As far as I'm aware poppy seeds don't have the same effects on the mind that other poppy products do!

 

[Egg Centric]

My bold, this isn't correct. There are blood levels that have to be reached before prosecution.

They are in effect zero tolerance levels (in the same way that in some countries the BAC level is 0.20% and this is referred to as zero tolerance) - basically it means you cannot use the intoxicating substance at all, rather than being set at levels where you would be intoxicated.

It would be incredibly unjust to have a "single molecule of substance" tolerance level which is what literal zero tolerance would mean. Any driver could randomly fail that if unlucky.

As it is, put neutrally the current drug drive levels are unjust from the perspective of penalising unsafe/dangerous driving, but just from the perspective of preventing illicit drug use.

Another analogy would be HIV where there is a campaign that U=U, basically saying that people with HIV where it is undetectable cannot pass it on through unprotected sex. Here, undetectable doesn't actually mean undetectable - it's generally detectable but at a very low level of virus per litre(?) of blood.

 

[mpthomson]

They are in effect zero tolerance levels (in the same way that in some countries the BAC level is 0.20% and this is referred to as zero tolerance) - basically it means you cannot use the intoxicating substance at all, rather than being set at levels where you would be intoxicated.

It would be incredibly unjust to have a "single molecule of substance" tolerance level which is what literal zero tolerance would mean. Any driver could randomly fail that if unlucky.

As it is, put neutrally the current drug drive levels are unjust from the perspective of penalising unsafe/dangerous driving, but just from the perspective of preventing illicit drug use.

Another analogy would be HIV where there is a campaign that U=U, basically saying that people with HIV where it is undetectable cannot pass it on through unprotected sex. Here, undetectable doesn't actually mean undetectable - it's generally detectable but at a very low level of virus per litre(?) of blood.

No, they aren't 'zero tolerance' levels, either in effect or reality. 0.20% in terms of alcohol isn't zero tolerance, there are several European countries that have real zero tolerance levels of 0.0% for all drivers, and others, including Germany, that have 0.0% for professional and HGV drivers and a higher value for the rest.

It's possible, and happens fairly regularly, to fail the roadside wipe for cannabis and/or cocaine after admitting use but be under the prosecutable limit once the evidentiary blood test result is returned. In this case no action can be taken against the driver for that specific offence.

The evidentiary drug tests very specifically don't show or indicate intoxication, they show the level of metabolites (the large majority of which are not psychoactive) of the drug showing that it has been taken at some point previously. In a civvy setting there is recent employment tribunal precedent for this where a company was found to have acted unreasonably when it fired someone claiming they had been intoxicated, when what the test actually showed was the presence of a significant amount of non-psychoactive cannabis metabolite, not that the person was intoxicated when they attended for work.

The level of metabolite purely shows whether someone was over the limit for that metabolite or not. For police tests the drug wipe indicates a presence but prosecution is determined on the level of the metabolites in the blood test that is then taken. This applies for all the common drugs tested for, police tests only test for cannabis and cocaine, others, such as the military CDT can pick up well over thirty separate substances. Most, but not all job related tests rely on urine testing to get a level, again this can only check for metabolites and most will work to the police prosecutable levels.

I work closely with these tests in two separate work settings, including with what happens to people if they fail them.

 

[Egg Centric]

No, they aren't 'zero tolerance' levels, either in effect or reality. 0.20% in terms of alcohol isn't zero tolerance, there are several European countries that have real zero tolerance levels of 0.0% for all drivers, and others, including Germany, that have 0.0% for professional and HGV drivers and a higher value for the rest.

It's possible, and happens fairly regularly, to fail the roadside wipe for cannabis and/or cocaine after admitting use but be under the prosecutable limit once the evidentiary blood test result is returned. In this case no action can be taken against the driver for that specific offence.

The evidentiary drug tests very specifically don't show or indicate intoxication, they show the level of metabolites (the large majority of which are not psychoactive) of the drug showing that it has been taken at some point previously. In a civvy setting there is recent employment tribunal precedent for this where a company was found to have acted unreasonably when it fired someone claiming they had been intoxicated, when what the test actually showed was the presence of a significant amount of non-psychoactive cannabis metabolite, not that the person was intoxicated when they attended for work.

The level of metabolite purely shows whether someone was over the limit for that metabolite or not. For police tests the drug wipe indicates a presence but prosecution is determined on the level of the metabolites in the blood test that is then taken. This applies for all the common drugs tested for, police tests only test for cannabis and cocaine, others, such as the military CDT can pick up well over thirty separate substances. Most, but not all job related tests rely on urine testing to get a level, again this can only check for metabolites and most will work to the police prosecutable levels.

I work closely with these tests in two separate work settings, including with what happens to people if they fail them.

This is at best a pedantic debate about the meaning of "zero tolerance".

The government themselves when setting the limits said:

Following a report from a panel of experts and a drug driving consultation the government decided to take:

• a zero tolerance approach to 8 drugs most associated with illegal use, with limits set at a level where any claims of accidental exposure can be ruled out
• a road safety risk based approach to 8 drugs most associated with medical uses
• a separate approach to amphetamine that balances its legitimate use for medical purposes against its abuse

 

[75A]

I remember the "Top House" pub in Butler Street, Preston where traincrews would drink before driving the Down Special TPO and the Royal Highlander sleeper. We mere station staff drank in the "Bottom House" before starting our night-shifts. That was the mid-1970s. Happy days!

A couple of turns @ Brighton MT in the early 80's come to mind.
The Brighton papers turn started by going 'pass' to Redhill where we went into the BR Social Club for a pint before taking the paper ECS to Victoria then taking the papers to Haywards Heath & Brighton.
On a Saturday morning there was a passenger train (a rarity in itself) to Exeter which we took to Salisbury where we had a lengthy break which involved pub grub etc.
Before going on the footplate i was in a Brighton P' Way gang who were frequent visitors to hostelries.
Wouldn't happen today, would it?

 

[185]

This is all that is wrong with the UK Legal System

Appeal rejected
Mr Glenholmes appealed this decision, which was rejected, and later took Network Rail to an employment tribunal to sue for unfair dismissal

Dismissal was ‘reasonable’
The judge said Mr Glenholmes “deliberately contradicted the terms” of the company’s drug policy

So he was fairly dismissed.

However, procedural errors in sacking the Network Rail worker meant his claims of unfair dismissal succeeded, but the judge denied him compensation.

So he was unfairly dismissed. Err

 

[1Q18]

This is all that is wrong with the UK Legal System





So he was fairly dismissed.



So he was unfairly dismissed. Err

Technically he was unfairly dismissed because Network Rail failed to follow the correct procedure, but because he had consumed a prohibited substance he was liable to be dismissed because of his own actions, hence being denied compensation. Seems fair enough to me.

Quote from the tribunal judgment:

…in my judgment the claimant was wholly to blame for his dismissal and although there were procedural problems with how the case was dealt with by the respondent, leading as it did to the respondent’s concession that the dismissal was procedurally unfair, these are not so serious as to mean the dismissal was substantively unfair and in my judgment it was not.

https://assets.publishing.service.g...astructure_Limited_2602425.2022_Judgement.pdf

 

[GRALISTAIR]

I have drunk coca leaves infused in hot water in Peru, it's quite common as it helps to relieve altitude sickness in the Andean mountains, I've never felt high nor is it addictive, I didn't drink it every day as I forced my body to get used to the thin atmosphere.

Yet the leaves is a source of processed cocaine which will show up in urine samples and that's where the problem lies as coca leaves is illegal in the UK, it shouldn't have been sold in the UK.

Yes, I was given that when I flew into Cuzco.

 

[Somewhere]

Before drug and alcohol testing you now declare whether you may have eaten a poppy seeded or even just seeded bread products, in case it produces a positive result.

Surely its in everyone's interest to declare that, then, even if they haven't?

 

[ComUtoR]

Surely its in everyone's interest to declare that, then, even if they haven't?

Are you suggesting people should lie before taking a drug test 'just in case' ? Saying you have eaten poppy seeds prior to the test would almost immediately cause suspicion and could subject your sample for additional testing. If that came back negative and the person was then challenged about a negative result, they may be forced to admit their lie and then be subject to disciplinary action.

The poppy seed result at my place was only found because the sensitivity of the test was changed and would never have appeared on a previous test. However, when looking at the results, they can determine the most likely use of the substance detected.

 

[cactustwirly]

The clue is in the name.

In the past people have failed a drugs test after having eaten poppy seed rolls

What drugs are they testing for to fail a test with poppy seeds?

 

[Mcr Warrior]

What drugs are they testing for to fail a test with poppy seeds?

Could be opiate-positive substances such codeine and/or morphine as would perhaps be tested in a urine sample. Believe that heroin can break down into these two substances. Poppy seeds apparently also have codeine and morphine in them, but normally in quite low concentrations. Makes it difficult to distinguish between poppy seeds and heroin use if the test result isn't that high.

 

[cactustwirly]

Could be opiate-positive substances such codeine and/or morphine as would perhaps be tested in a urine sample. Believe that heroin can break down into these two substances. Poppy seeds apparently also have codeine and morphine in them, but normally in quite low concentrations.

So you're not allowed to take off the shelf painkillers either?

 

[43066]

Are you suggesting people should lie before taking a drug test 'just in case' ? Saying you have eaten poppy seeds prior to the test would almost immediately cause suspicion and could subject your sample for additional testing. If that came back negative and the person was then challenged about a negative result, they may be forced to admit their lie and then be subject to disciplinary action.

The poppy seed result at my place was only found because the sensitivity of the test was changed and would never have appeared on a previous test. However, when looking at the results, they can determine the most likely use of the substance detected.

AIUI the declaration is for medication. I’ve never heard of anyone being asked to declare whether they’ve eaten poppy seeds. Frankly I suspect it’s a bit of an old wives’ tale that they cause D&A test failures.

So you're not allowed to take off the shelf painkillers either?

Anything beyond paracetamol/aspirin needs to be declared. Even over the counter hay fever remedies or cough mixtures may not be acceptable if they can cause drowsiness, for example.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

So you're not allowed to take off the shelf painkillers either?

Could be. Probably depends on the sensitivity of the testing regime. Would imagine that this is an area where athletes / sportspeople sometimes have issues.

 

[Neo9320]

So you're not allowed to take off the shelf painkillers either?

The levels in over the counter medication are negligible, although you should be advised to disclose the medication prior to the test.

I used to work in the addiction field and people would always try and say that their positive opioid tests were down to taking medication! (A story heard multiple times daily!)

On top of this, any medication that ‘may cause drowsiness or impairment’ should not be taken prior to working in a safety critical role. Alternatives exist. Just ask your pharmacist.

Edit: I see others have mentioned this whilst I was typing. Sorry to be repetitive.

 

[cactustwirly]

Could be opiate-positive substances such codeine and/or morphine as would perhaps be tested in a urine sample. Believe that heroin can break down into these two substances. Poppy seeds apparently also have codeine and morphine in them, but normally in quite low concentrations. Makes it difficult to distinguish between poppy seeds and heroin use if the test result isn't that high.

Your body metabolises Heroin to Morphine, the high experienced is actually Morphine, but the structure of Heroin means it can cross the blood brain barrier easier.
Codeine comes from the same seed as morphine but isn't indicative of Heroin consumption.

The amount of opioids in poppy seeds is tiny, you must be eating a crazy amount to fail a test

The levels in over the counter medication are negligible, although you should be advised to disclose the medication prior to the test.

I used to work in the addiction field and people would always try and say that their positive opioid tests were down to taking medication! (A story heard multiple times daily!)

On top of this, any medication that ‘may cause drowsiness or impairment’ should not be taken prior to working in a safety critical role. Alternatives exist. Just ask your pharmacist.

I was thinking of Co-codamol for example which is a source of Codeine

 

[Neo9320]

Your body metabolises Heroin to Morphine, the high experienced is actually Morphine, but the structure of Heroin means it can cross the blood brain barrier easier.
Codeine comes from the same seed as morphine but isn't indicative of Heroin consumption.

The amount of opioids in poppy seeds is tiny, you must be eating a crazy amount to fail a test


I was thinking of Co-codamol for example which is a source of Codeine

I believe the over the counter 250/15mg (or something like that) is just on the edge. But I guess if you’re popping them like sweeties you’ll get a positive result. Anyone in that much pain probably shouldn’t be at work lol

 

[Mcr Warrior]

The amount of opioids in poppy seeds is tiny, you must be eating a crazy amount to fail a test.

Depends on the sensitivity of the testing, but, yes, much lower concentrations. That's why most folk won't ever get 'high' from eating poppy seed coated baguettes.

 

[1Q18]

So you're not allowed to take off the shelf painkillers either?

Anything beyond paracetamol or ibuprofen I declare to my employer, both in case I get pulled for testing and so that I can have verification that I‘m still safe to work. It’s not worth running the risk otherwise.

 

[Joliver]

Anything beyond paracetamol or ibuprofen I declare to my employer, both in case I get pulled for testing and so that I can have verification that I‘m still safe to work. It’s not worth running the risk otherwise.

At my employer, we have to declare/med screen everything. Got a headache? Can't take a paracetamol until it's been checked.

 

[Neo9320]

At my employer, we have to declare/med screen everything. Got a headache? Can't take a paracetamol until it's been checked.

A very sensible approach. Might seem like ‘elf and safety gone mad’ but much better to be safe than risk lives. People far too often underestimate the side effects of medication.

 

[Bald Rick]

I must admit I’ve always been slightly suspicious of the “I ate poppy seeds and failed a drug test” tales. The testing is robust enough not to attract false positives, and these excuses are invariably used by those who have taken something they shouldn’t have and been found out.

Frankly I suspect it’s a bit of an old wives’ tale that they cause D&A test failures.

I do know someone who failed a D&A due to having very recently consumed a big poppy seed roll (as in the roll was big with lots of poppy seeds, not that the poppy seeds were big )

And I can assure readers that he was not a user of Class A drugs. If he was, he did a very good job of hiding it.

This was in the early days of D&A though, so perhaps the tests were more rudimentary.

 

[ComUtoR]

This was in the early days of D&A though, so perhaps the tests were more rudimentary.

The poppy seed thing is about test sensitivity and how your body will metabolise various drugs.

https://www.ukdrugtesting.co.uk/pages/drug-test-detection-times-levels Shows a table of various drug groups and their detection. An example of which :

Urine
Opiate / Morphine (Abbreviation PI)
2-4 days (Detection period)
2000ng/mL (Cut off)

There is also a question of which drugs are tested for. Our new (Industry standard) testing does not include Tramadol. Even when a drug is detected, they know and can work out when they were last taken and generally how long for. I'd agree drug testing has got better but it isn't what is generally reported and a lot more technical than people realise.

Same website :

* Cannabis THC detection times in urine have been reported as testing positive up to 45 days after last use following heavy long term Cannabis use in individuals with high residual body fat levels, as THC is stored in fat and can be released gradually. This is particular common if an ultra sensitive 20ng or 25ng THC detection urine drug test is used in place of the usual 50ng THC detection test. How long THC stays in a person's system varies hugely between individuals.

The science behind drug testing is incredible and albeit a little subjective. Generally when people 'fail' they fail quite badly. With the case of Mr Glenholme. He was 4x over 'the limit'.

Frankly I suspect it’s a bit of an old wives’ tale that they cause D&A test failures.

I'm sure we have the same doubts but it can and does happen. You would need to ingest a large amount of seeds or have a very sensitive test to detect them, and it certainly isn't a case of I had a poppy seed bagel 20 minutes ago and that's what has been detected.

Anything beyond paracetamol/aspirin needs to be declared. Even over the counter hay fever remedies or cough mixtures may not be acceptable if they can cause drowsiness, for example.

So you're not allowed to take off the shelf painkillers either?

As @43066 states, medication needs to declared. It isn't so much about not taking the medication; part of the declaration process is so that medication is cleared to be safe for Safety Critical work. Many Drivers are on medication that will flag on a Drugs test but they are declared and cleared. Rail D&A policies are very rigorous and almost to the point of being strict liability. If you fail to declare - Termination, If you test positive - Termination, Ignorance is no defence - Termination, refusal to test - Termination. Technically you should declare everything. So yes, even paracetamol should be declared too. A big part of the declaration is also to determine the reason you are taking the drug. Chain of care can be carried out and fitness for work can be assessed.

One of the biggest issues with medication comes from Hay Fever tablets. The formulations change (as with all medications) and one year a certain brand may be OK to take, but the next year its banned. Declaring every time ensure you are always within policy and therefore protected.

 

[mpthomson]

This is at best a pedantic debate about the meaning of "zero tolerance".

The government themselves when setting the limits said:

It's not, it's an accurate and legally based explanation of zero tolerance as it applies to drugs and driving. What the government says (for good reasons) and the reality aren't the same. It is perfectly possible to test positive for an illegal drug at the roadside but be under the prosecutable limit when the evidential test is carried out and it happens routinely. That's not zero tolerance. The limit for driving isn't zero.

Your body metabolises Heroin to Morphine, the high experienced is actually Morphine, but the structure of Heroin means it can cross the blood brain barrier easier.
Codeine comes from the same seed as morphine but isn't indicative of Heroin consumption.

The amount of opioids in poppy seeds is tiny, you must be eating a crazy amount to fail a test


I was thinking of Co-codamol for example which is a source of Codeine

Any over the counter or prescribed medication containing codeine needs to be declared in a military setting (and I presume others that use tests that can pick it up opioids). It shows up as an opioid rather than anything more specific.

 

[LAX54]

So you're not allowed to take off the shelf painkillers either?

If you are 'tested' you must declare any over the counter medicines you have taken, if you don't and fail, then you will be suspended pending further investiagtion.
In fact with NR you have to get clearance to take every med, even over the counter, ideally before taking them, if you dont, you do risk 'problems'

 

[DarloRich]

Anything beyond paracetamol or ibuprofen I declare to my employer, both in case I get pulled for testing and so that I can have verification that I‘m still safe to work. It’s not worth running the risk otherwise.

Same here - best to be sensible and safe.

 

[The Puddock]

If you are 'tested' you must declare any over the counter medicines you have taken, if you don't and fail, then you will be suspended pending further investiagtion.
In fact with NR you have to get clearance to take every med, even over the counter, ideally before taking them, if you dont, you do risk 'problems'

Recent Network Rail D&A tests I have witnessed (two randoms and a 'for cause') didn't feature the nurse asking the donor to declare any medication and the paperwork didn't ask either. The test equipment itself has changed - it's now a little bit like a Covid test with urine so you get a result for various substances there and then, depending on whether lines appear or colour changes. The sample only gets sent off to a laboratory for further testing if the kit indicates a fail. I don't know whether the new kit means they're confident enough in the initial results to not bother with asking about medication but it certainly wasn't done at the three tests I've witnessed. Although obviously if you know you've taken something it would be very wise to declare it anyway!

 

[Bald Rick]

The test equipment itself has changed - it's now a little bit like a Covid test with urine

where do you stick the cottonbud !!!!