Legal Briefs

1. Skinner v. Railway Labor Executives' Association

Citation: 489 U.S. 602, 109 S. Ct. 1402, 103 L. Ed. 2d 639, 13 OSHC 2065, 130 LRRM 2857, 4 IER Cases 224 (1989)

Fact(s): Federal American Railroad (FRA) provides safety measures to assure railway transportation. For this reason the most important concern for FRA is the accidents due to the use of drugs and alcohol by the employees during their work hours. To avoid these issues FRA ordered safety regulations according to which it was mandatory for all the railway employees to have blood and urine test to check if they are using alcohol or narcotics. In case of any violation of the safety rules there was also rule to have blood test.

On the other hand Skinner provides the rules of United States Supreme Court that only a random use of drug is allowed to employees but in the safety conditions that it must not create problem for the life and safety of public. It is a very common phenomenon that the use of drugs and alcohol is the very common activity of the society and people cannot be prevented completely from these rights but there is one condition that these people during their work must not allowed but can use only randomly and only in appropriate quantity.

Issue(s): The fourth amendment of FRA result in the controversy for the use of Alcohol and drugs at work place and it creates conflict with Supreme Court rules in Skinner.

Ruling: In case of skinner vs. Railroad executives and the Fourth amendment by FRA provides that there is controversy between these two rules. The court decides that the main reason for the issue is the violation of fourth amendment through this order but according to the court summary there is no violation of fourth amendment. The court of appeal then provide ruling that a suspicion is also provide to these conditions in case if there is need for the test there must be some proper criteria for it. It is also provided that there is also need for the proper reasons for the blood, urine and breath test of these employees. Another important point for the deciding this case in this way is that the case is also requires being strong and there must be proper evidences of the use of drugs in the blood.

Rationale: The main reason for this decision is the basic right of citizens, according to which every citizen has right to be secure in their premises. These citizens were not supposed to be checked or arrest without any warrant or proper reason. This protects the employee from checking on regular basis. Another concern about this case is that these people like all other people have right to drink as it is not illegal in normal quantity. It is not possible to impose restriction for the life time as these people are in this field and during these tests the report shows the drugs or alcohol taken during their off ...