Nilges Legal Group LLC

Blog / Posts

Can you sue your boss over drug test privacy issues?

drug test

The Ohio Supreme Court recently ruled in a case revolving around privacy rights during employment drug screenings. Employers can now have someone watch when employees give urine samples.

The Supreme Court ruling stems from a case involving Donna Lundsford, whose concern for workplace privacy rights sparked an investigation by 19 News in June 2020.

"I was pretty upset, pretty horrified,” she told 19 News. "They have blatantly just said 'If you work in Ohio, we pretty much don’t care about you.'"

Direct observation during drug screening and invasion of privacy

Lundsford's lawsuit was against her former employer, Sterilite in Stark County. She worked there for more than 20 years. Lundsford claimed that the company supervisors began requiring employees to take drug tests under the direct observation method.

Direct observation was put in place to ensure that employees don't cheat on drug tests. It involves observation from the technician administering the drug test while an employee gives a urine sample.

“The court has ruled that that was an acceptable method by Sterilite,” said Lundsford's attorney. “In other words, you have to check your dignity at the door.”

“It could happen to anyone at any time if you are an employee in Ohio,” Lundsford added.

Initially, the trial judge involved in the case ruled against Lundsford. The case was later sent to the Ohio Supreme Court after a unanimous decision by three appellate court judges. Only six judges ruled in favor of Lundsford.

Lundsford has not yet given up. She recently started a GoFundMe page to raise money to file a motion for reconsideration. Her attorney believes that this action could potentially turn things around.

“The legislature could see this decision, realize that six out of 11 judges saw it the other way, and fix it! Because you can pass laws that prohibit this kind of conduct,” he said.

Reactions from Ohio lawmakers

Several Ohio lawmakers were asked if they'd consider proposing legislation against direct observation during drug screenings. At least three lawmakers said they would consider doing so. These lawmakers include:

Senator Nickie Antonio:

“I agree with the dissenting opinion from our Supreme Court members. I am appalled by this kind of invasive drug testing procedure that really violates a person’s bodily privacy, and at the same time, seems to humiliate employees and could create a hostile work environment. At the very least, if a company is using these types of methods, employees need to be informed before the test is administered. Now that this has come to my attention, I will be researching further into this form of employee drug testing and may sponsor legislation banning it.”

State Representative Bride Rose Sweeney:

“The Ohio Supreme Court’s 4-3 ruling failed to set a bare minimum standard for working people when it comes to privacy. Ohioans should be respected and assured of the dignity of their work. Yet like so many of our state’s institutions plagued by one-party rule, the Court came up short. I would be very interested in reviewing and potentially supporting legislation that might come forward from this decision so that we can put workers first.”

State Representative Juanita Brent:

“The state of Ohio needs to have legislation that will allow employers to test employees for drugs, with the employees dignity intact. Getting undressed in front of a stranger can cause unnecessary trauma to an employee. One idea I have that needs to be vetted would include, the employee removing all clothes and only wearing a medical gown while taking the drug test (urinating). This process will allow private urination and reduce the possibility of fake or another non-employee urine to be used. If Ohio wants our job force to increase than all employees must be able to work with dignity and not in fear of losing their job.”

Contact our Ohio law firm if you are facing legal challenges at work

The Ohio employment law attorneys at Nilges Draher LLC will be following this issue and hope to see legislation that protects the privacy of Ohio employees.

If you are facing any legal challenges pertaining to your employer, our attorneys can help. We handle cases involving wrongful termination, discrimination, harassment, wage law, medical leave and other employment law issues.

We serve clients across Ohio and the United States. To schedule your free legal consultation, contact us online.

Posted in:

Related Posts

How to Document Employment Discrimination

You have the right to a workplace free of unlawful discrimination and harassment based on protected characteristics like race, national origin, sex, and religion. You also have legal recourse if those rights have been violated. However, the law doesn’t enforce itself; to hold your employer accountable, you need to document the unlawful behavior. Make sure you have the evidence to protect your rights at work The right documentation can make all the difference in a complicated employment discrimination case. Write down what happened, including the following: What was said and who said it If comments have been made at work related to your race, religion, gender, or another protected characteristic, who made those comments? Was it a supervisor or a coworker? Keep detailed records of those comments and each person’s rank in the corporate hierarchy. When comments were made and actions were taken Timing is critical in employment discrimination claims, for a few reasons. First, there are strict deadlines that apply to discrimination cases, so the timing of the discriminatory behavior or employment action can affect the amount of time you have to take legal action. Second, keeping records of time can help to establish patterns of behavior, which can be critical in your employment case. Who, if anyone, witnessed the discriminatory or harassing behavior Witnesses can play an important role in employment cases. They can verify what happened and provide powerful testimony in court if necessary. Make sure you write down the names and contact information of any witnesses so your lawyer can follow up with them later. Whether you reported the behavior, formally or informally Reporting discrimination or harassment puts your employer “on notice” that it’s happening under their watch. That’s why it’s important to keep a written record of any reports you made to a manager, human resources, or anyone else in charge in your workplace. You can make a report orally, but it’s best to put it in writing (a quick follow-up email will do) to ensure that you have a record of making the report. Make sure you keep records outside your employer’s systems It’s critical that you have your own records of the discriminatory or harassing behavior, outside your employer’s control. Keeping personal records ensures that you will have access to this information if your employer unexpectedly fires you or cuts off your access to their systems. In addition to records of the discrimination or harassment itself, make sure you keep copies of your performance reviews, communications from supervisors, and any other information that speaks to your overall job performance. If you are fired, demoted, reassigned, or otherwise targeted, your employer will likely try to argue their decision was related to a non-discriminatory reason such as job performance. If you can verify that you met or exceeded expectations in your job, you will be in a better position. Talk to an experienced employment lawyer today Again, employment discrimination cases can be complex, and there are strict deadlines that must be followed. That’s why getting legal representation as soon as possible is so important. If you believe you have been illegally discriminated against or harassed at work, contact Nilges Draher LLC in Ohio for a free case evaluation. With offices in North Canton, Cleveland, and Columbus, our employment attorneys offer legal representation to workers nationwide. "Was dealing with an issue and needed some advice, so I reached out to the firm. I got a callback within a half hour and was speaking to an attorney the very next day." — James W.

Employer Faces ADA Lawsuit for Denying Remote Work as an Accommodation

A recent lawsuit filed by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) sheds a light on a contentious issue in 21 st century workplaces: remote work as an accommodation for disabled workers. Under the federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), employers with 15 or more employees must provide reasonable accommodations for qualifying disabled workers and cannot retaliate or discriminate against workers who need accommodations. Disability accommodations are a complex and evolving area of law, however, so it’s always important to get legal advice and understand your rights and options. Our disability discrimination attorneys can help. What employers are and aren’t required to do to accommodate disabled workers According to the EEOC, employers are required to provide reasonable accommodations to qualifying individuals with disabilities. A “qualifying” worker is someone who can perform the essential functions of the job, with or without a reasonable accommodation. Note that under the ADA, employers are not required to provide the exact accommodation that an employee requires. For example, if an employee requests remote work as an accommodation, the employer might offer an alternative, such as allowing the employee to work in a different part of the office or a satellite location closer to home, depending on the nature of the disability and the reasons for the request. The key is that the employer must engage in an interactive process to find an accommodation that works for both parties. In the EEOC lawsuit filed in September, the employee, a customer service representative, asked to work from home after suffering a stroke, both because she couldn’t drive and because the lights in her employer’s office exacerbated the headaches she suffered from as a result of the stroke. The employer denied the accommodation and eventually fired the employee for taking leave to attend medical appointments. According to the EEOC, the employer violated the employee’s rights under the ADA by denying the accommodation and by retaliating against her. Key considerations in ADA cases In disability accommodation claims, including remote work accommodation claims, a key question is what the “essential functions of the job” are and whether the employee can perform them with or without accommodations. These “essential functions” are based on the employee's actual day-to-day job duties, not their written job description. For example, if the job description says, “must be able to lift 50 pounds,” but the actual job duties rarely, if ever, involve lifting heavy objects, then that is likely not an essential function of the job. Another key question is whether a particular accommodation is “reasonable.” In addition to remote or hybrid work, reasonable accommodations might include modified work hours, extra breaks or leave (paid or unpaid), assistive technology, accessible parking, modified work locations (such as a first-floor office for an employee who can’t climb stairs), and assistive technology. However, the employer is not required to make an accommodation that would represent an “undue hardship;” that is, a significant difficulty or expense for the employer. When there is a dispute over whether a particular accommodation is “reasonable,” one important consideration is whether the employer has already made the same accommodation for other employees (whether they are disabled or not). For example, if an employer has previously allowed hybrid or remote work for some workers, it’s much harder to argue that it would be an undue hardship to accommodate a disabled employee who requests remote work today. If you are facing disability discrimination, we can help Disabled workers face incredible challenges in the workplace, even though more accommodations are possible today than ever before. Too many employers don’t comply with the requirements of the ADA, and employees are left to suffer the consequences. If you’re in that situation, you have recourse. We can help. The experienced employment law attorneys at Nilges Draher LLC have recovered over $50 million (and counting) for workers in Ohio and beyond. Give us a call or contact us online for a free, confidential case evaluation.

U.S. Department of Labor Introduces Inclusive AI Hiring Guidelines

The U.S. Department of Labor has unveiled a new tool designed to make hiring practices more accessible and fairer for people with disabilities. The AI & Inclusive Hiring Framework can guide employers in using artificial intelligence to help rather than hinder disabled job seekers. Published by the Partnership on Employment & Accessible Technology (PEAT), the framework offers a blueprint for using AI hiring technology without unintentionally creating discriminatory barriers. This initiative was funded by the department's Office of Disability Employment Policy. What is the AI & Inclusive Hiring Framework? The AI & Inclusive Hiring Framework provides employers with guidelines to ensure they use their AI tools inclusively. This will help prevent bias from slipping through the cracks. With the rise of AI in hiring, the risk of overlooking qualified applicants due to poorly designed algorithms is real. PEAT's framework was built on best practices from the National Institute of Standards and Technology's (NIST) AI Risk Management Framework. The guidance helps employers see the benefits AI can bring to their hiring process while avoiding pitfalls that could harm applicants. ODEP and PEAT developed the framework in partnership with NIST. It also factored in feedback from disability advocates, AI experts, industry leaders, and the public. The framework outlines 10 areas of focus for employers to follow. Each area focuses on practices, goals, and activities that can help businesses adopt inclusive hiring initiatives. How will this framework promote inclusive hiring? The AI & Inclusive Hiring Framework came to life following a PEAT Think Tank held in April 2023. The development process included listening sessions with experts and input from a national online public dialogue. ODEP, PEAT, NIST, and other partners worked together to create a tool that both employers and workers can use. According to Assistant Secretary for Disability Employment Policy Taryn Williams, employers should use this framework to tap into the talent pool of people with disabilities. "The Office of Disability Employment Policy works with many employers eager to hire people with disabilities and benefit from their talents," Williams said. "These employers recognize that AI tools can improve recruitment and hiring but may also impact workplace culture and inclusion of disabled employees. The AI & Inclusive Hiring Framework published today charts a clear course for employers to navigate this transformation successfully." The framework doesn't just focus on employers. It's also there to empower job seekers, by helping them understand the benefits and challenges they may face when encountering AI-enabled hiring technologies. How does this framework align with equity? The framework aligns with the Biden-Harris administration's efforts to ensure AI technology supports, rather than hinders, workers' employment opportunities. In October 2022, the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy released the "Blueprint for an AI Bill of Rights." This document laid out standards for more equitable and inclusive digital hiring. The AI & Inclusive Hiring Framework takes those principles and puts them into action. This framework offers an important step forward for ensuring no qualified candidate is overlooked due to inaccessible or biased technology. It provides a practical, actionable guide for employers who are committed to making their hiring practices more equitable. What are my legal options if I face discrimination from employers? If you've faced discrimination during the hiring process in Ohio—whether because of a disability, race, gender, or any other protected status—you deserve justice. Discrimination isn't just wrong; it's illegal, and you have the right to stand up against it. Employers who misuse AI or other hiring practices to discriminate must be held accountable. The Ohio workplace discrimination lawyers at Nilges Draher LLC know how to take on companies that won't admit wrongdoing. We have the case results to prove it, including: A $5.9 million settlement for workers misclassified as outside salespersons and denied overtime pay. $4 million settlement for a class of workers not compensated for all break times. $1.25 million settlement for oil field workers improperly paid on a day rate without overtime compensation. Our legal team is here to listen, advocate, and fight for your rights. We operate on a contingency fee basis, meaning we don't get paid unless you do, and your initial consultation is always free. Contact us today to schedule your case evaluation and take the first step toward protecting your rights.