Health committee  No. The Supreme Court of Canada has said that except in extremely rare circumstances, you can't do that—or not unless the legislation was amended. But I don't think that's the main point of testing. People get a little bent out of shape about testing, especially on the union side

Health committee  No. The decision in Irving Pulp & Paper essentially said that the employer had two choices if they wanted a random test. This is only a random alcohol testing case. One, you either consult with and get agreement from the union...and the union said no. I'll come back to that p

Health committee  You're right.

Health committee  That was the ruling.

Health committee  Yes.

Health committee  I'm not a doctor and I don't even play one on TV, but I've done a lot of reading in the area. What I'd encourage the committee to look at is the injunction decision of the Honourable Justice Frank Marrocco on the TTC policy “fitness for duty”. What it essentially does is it tak

Health committee  From talking to the chief safety officer at the TTC, I understand that the employer bears the entire cost of the program, so it's you and I, as TTC riders, if we're in Toronto. It's the public.

Health committee  A lot of statistics, largely out of the U.S., indicate that as soon as you have a random alcohol testing program in place, use goes down by more than 50%. Allowing testing will reduce the risk for everybody, period, but then you get to the problem about somebody who is being test

Health committee  With respect, if they're on a private property, they wouldn't.

Health committee  But it won't be.... All I'm saying is that on a practical level, it will have no benefit or effect.

Health committee  The obligation is still going to be the overriding obligation of the employer to have a safe workplace. If an employer thinks somebody is impaired, are they going to call the police to their workplace to do their job for them? The labour regulator, federal or provincial, will int

Health committee  In my opinion, sir, no. The companion bill seems to assume that it's only the public that might be harmed or killed by somebody under the influence of cannabis. It ignores every working Canadian who goes to work every day, especially in and around safety sensitive positions. Sin

Health committee  I'm not sure they're all fairly comparable to being impaired by cannabis, but an employer has an overarching duty, as I mentioned in my brief, under the Canada Labour Code and every provincial statute, to have a safe workplace for all workers. That's fine and that has been there

Health committee  Thank you and good morning. In a moment, I am going to take you to five recommended changes to the legislation. I have advised and represented employers and employer associations on this issue for many years and have written a book on the subject of alcohol and drugs in the wor