The Analytical Zen Podcast
Unveiling the Science Behind the Mystery: Exploring Forensics, Toxicology, Medicine and Health (Mind, Body and Spirit)
The Analytical Zen Podcast
Forensic Toxicology Preventing Mishaps: How Drug Testing Became a Workplace Essential
Unlock the secrets of forensic toxicology and workplace drug testing. From naval mishaps to train collisions, discover the pivotal incidents that have shaped workplace drug testing policies and why they matter.
Join us as we chat with Steve Korkoneas as he sheds light on the widespread practice of workplace drug testing. Whether you're in a safety-critical role or curious about the future of drug testing then this episode promises a wealth of knowledge. So, grab a notepad and maybe a snack (that’s not on the banned list) as we embark on a insightful conversation this week hosted by Dr Geraldine M. Dowling SFHEA
Join the conversation at The Analytical Zen Podcast! Reach out to us via email at theanalyticalzenpodcast@gmail.com.
The opinions expressed by the guests are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Analytical Zen Podcast.
Welcome to the Analytical Zen Podcast, where we delve into the minds of leading scientists and professionals exploring forensics, toxicology, medicine and health in terms of mind, body and spirit. I'm your host, eraldine M Dowling. What should you expect in the Analytical Zen podcast? Well, we'll dive into cutting edge research and topics that inspire curiosity, the latest in forensic and clinical toxicology pursuits and engage in conversations and perspectives from disciplines outside of these fields. So thanks for tuning in. We've taken a brief pause from recording the Analytical Zen podcast as the teaching semester kicks off for myself and I'm busy preparing for conferences with my postgraduate students but now we're excited to be back with more insightful discussions. So, ladies and gentlemen, buckle up for a wild ride into the world of forensic science.
Dr Geraldine M. Dowling SFHEA:Our next guest is a true master. He's Steve "Stavros Korkoneas, a forensic toxicologist who knows more about what's in your system than your last three doctors combined, as he specialises in workplace drug testing. When he's not busy making sure your co-workers aren't mixing fresh fruit juice with something stronger, you can find him serving on many associations in the discipline, for example as the secretary of the Workplace Drug Testing Association in Australia. That's right. If you're wondering if your lunch break might lead to a surprise test. Well, Steve is the one who'll have all the answers. So grab your notepads and maybe a snack. Just make sure it's not one on the banned substances list as we dive into the fascinating world of forensic toxicology and workplace drug testing. Please welcome Steve Korkanios.
Steve Korkoneas:Thank you, Geraldine for the kind introduction.
Dr Geraldine M. Dowling SFHEA:It's a pleasure to have you. You're a member of various organisations and associations. Can you give our listeners an overview?
Steve Korkoneas:Yes, thank you, Geraldine. I specialise in workplace drug testing. I've been doing workplace drug testing for 20 plus years. I'm a member of the International Association of Forensic Toxicologists as everyone knows from 2002 to present. I'm on the committee of the Australian and New Zealand Forensic Science Society from 2004 to 2007 and 2022 to present. I'm also a member of the Forensic and Clinical Toxicology Association from 2010 to present and as mentioned, I'm the current secretary of the Workplace Drug Testing Association since 2022. I'm also an elected representative of the CH039 Joint Technical Committee since 2019 in Australia. The origins of workplace drug testing, like pretty much everything in our forensic toxicology field stems from the United States.
Dr Geraldine M. Dowling SFHEA:Steve, can you explain what workplace drug testing is and why it matters?
Steve Korkoneas:Thank you, Geraldine. In Australia, workplace drug testing has historically been safety-based, that is, its aim is to protect people who may be unsafe to be at work. So if you work in a role where you operate machinery drive vehicles, do manual work or perform any other task that is seen as safety critical, you may have experienced workplace drug testing. The origins of workplace drug testing started in the United States. There are two main incidents that are believed to have led to the start of widespread drug testing in the workplace in that country. The first incident occurred in 1981, an accident by a naval ship, led to the deaths of 14 soldiers and investigated in the US. Further 48 were injured and damage to the ship was in the order of millions, a massive cost at that time. Autopsies of those killed discovered that six of the soldiers had cannabis in their system, leading to a new policy around drug testing within the United States Department of Defense. The second incident happened in 1987. A set of freight locomotives collided with passenger train thus killing 16 people. The accident occurred because the locomotives failed to stop at a set of signals. It was later determined that the locomotive crew was smoking cannabis, and this was likely the reason for them not stopping at the signals and causing the accident.
Steve Korkoneas:In the United States today, workplace drug testing is very commonplace, not just in those roles to do with safety. This is why around 80% of employees in United States undergo drug and alcohol testing, compared to an estimated 30% in Australia. Workplace drug testing in Australia began in the late 1980s. It is believed that New South Wales State Rail Authority was the first Australian company to conduct workplace drug testing. Other organisations soon followed. The Exxon Valdez disaster also initiated testing around the world and in Australia in particular, a company called ESSO, which introduced testing in the late 80s. In the United States, where specific laws on workplace drug testing exist, Australia has also specific laws relating to drug testing in mining, aviation and transportation. However, many other safety-critical roles and industries have enacted their own policy and procedures.
Dr Geraldine M. Dowling SFHEA:Steve, can you clarify what the audience will gain from the short interview?
Steve Korkoneas:I hope the audience by the end of the podcast understands why alcohol and other drug testing is important in keeping people safe in the workplace.
Dr Geraldine M. Dowling SFHEA:Steve, how did you get into forensic toxicology?
Steve Korkoneas:Good question. I was employed straight out of university in a laboratory that performed drug testing in the horse and greyhound industry and was performing some workplace drug testing at that time.
Dr Geraldine M. Dowling SFHEA:What excites you most about your work, Steve?
Steve Korkoneas:Knowing that I'm keeping people safe at their workplace, knowing the work I do and by doing so many others and individuals will be going home after their shift ends.
Dr Geraldine M. Dowling SFHEA:What's the biggest misconception about forensic toxicology workplace drug testing?
Steve Korkoneas:Yes, Geraldine, the biggest, biggest concern is impairment and presence. So workplace alcohol and other drug testing is not, and has never been about detecting impairment. Rather, it serves as a risk mitigation tool, providing an objective measure to reinforce an employee's AOD testing policy and procedure. It seems to have been confused, especially recently in workplace drug testing.
Dr Geraldine M. Dowling SFHEA:Steve, I'm fascinated by workplace drug testing cases. Can I ask you to describe some examples of memorable cases?
Steve Korkoneas:Yes, I'll go through what we term Fair Work Commission, which is an employment scenario. The most important one recently has been the CFMEU, which is a union, versus Port Kembla coal terminal, which is the employer. This decision happened in 2015. And the decision was they wanted to introduce random drug testing in the workplace. They wanted to conduct either urine or oral fluid, but the union did not want urine testing for obvious reasons, and Commissioner Cambridge at the time and it's a very very important decision. I summarized the decision in a blunt distillation of the contest in this case and its determination can be described as a choice between private lives or saving lives and I've opted for saving lives. So that was a very, very important decision back in 2015 where the Port Kembla coal terminal was allowed to have both urine and or oral fluid in their random drug testing program on a 50-50 percent basis and that seems to be the common thread now in policy and procedures based on the CFMEU Port Kembla coal terminal decision.
Steve Korkoneas:Another decision recently was to deal with medicinal cannabis. The employer submitted ancillary contention that he was not impaired when he attended for work is simply not relevant in circumstances where impairment was not the reason relied on for terminating his employment. Rather, the finding of serious misconduct related to the worker breaching the AD policy by attending work with a prescribed drug in his system and failing to declare that he had been prescribed and was consuming medicinal cannabis. So this is a very, very important decision. It was not based on impairment but rather on not declaring the prescription medication at the time. So the employer's position asserted that the issue at hand was not about impairment but about policy compliance. The Fair Work Commission found in favour of the employer, including that this mission was not harsh, unjust or unreasonable and four key points in the decision were the AD policy was deemed lawful and reasonable. The worker was aware of his responsibilities under the policy to declare his prescription medication but chose not to. The worker knowingly and willfully breached this policy and procedure. The commission found the worker breach was to be serious and the disciplinary process was found to be fair with the worker given multiple opportunities to respond. The Commission goes on further, consistent with the views of the full bench. I do not consider the worker's service cooperation and remorse to the relevant to the core issue, which is the worker seriously breached the AOD policy and procedure. This statement highlights that long service does not excuse serious policy breaches, especially when safety is at stake. Finally, the Commission concluded, having considered each of the matters specified in Section 387 of the Act, I am satisfied that the worker dismissal was not harsh, unjust or unreasonable. Accordingly, I find the dismissal was not unfair.
Steve Korkoneas:Nothing can be more important than protecting health and safety in the workplace and a drug and alcohol policy is one important means of doing so. Failure to comply with a reasonable workplace drug and alcohol policy is totally unacceptable, first and foremost because it undermines the efforts to keep workers safe. Secondly, because it exposes the employer to significant risk in the workplace. So, as you can see, that was a very, very important decision, regardless of the individual claiming not to be impaired. That was not taken into consideration. Individual claiming not to be impaired that was not taken into consideration. The only consideration that the commissioner took in was the breach of policy and procedure or that person not advising of his employer that they were on prescription medication namely medicinal cannabis.
Steve Korkoneas:Another one I would like to raise of an interesting case that I was involved in many years ago. An air hostess submitted to a random urine drug test. The on-site results came back as an unconfirmed cocaine and metabolite. To the surprise of the air hostess, the sample was sent away and the laboratory confirmed benzoylecgonine, which everyone knows is a metabolite of cocaine. The air hostess was adamant that no cocaine was consumed.
Steve Korkoneas:I called the air hostess to discuss the laboratory result. We went through all that was consumed in the last one to five days by the air hostess. The air hostess remembered attending a naturopath regarding some stomach issues they were having at the time and was given a green tea by the naturopath. That rang alarm bells to me. I asked if the individual could follow up with the naturopath and find out what was specifically given in the green tea and lo and behold, the air hostess came back with a coca tea box label which obviously contained cocaine. And the mystery was solved and unfortunately that person was disciplined. I don't think they lost their job, but they were on their first and final warning because that was accidental ingestion at the time.
Dr Geraldine M. Dowling SFHEA:How do you think technology has changed in the field?
Steve Korkoneas:Yes, significant progress has been made in regards to on-site testing devices, both oral fluid and urine and laboratory testing has significantly improved in the last 10 years and is trying to keep up with what's happening with the NPSs and the synthetic drugs that are currently flooding the market.
Dr Geraldine M. Dowling SFHEA:Steve, what do you think are some of the most common challenges that toxicologists face?
Steve Korkoneas:Yeah, the common challenges, especially in the last couple of years, is the legal challenges on the merits of AD drug testing in the workplace. Second one is impairment versus presence. There is a change, especially in Australia, looking for impairment rather than presence and this is a major concern. I reiterate workplace alcohol and other drug testing is not, and has never been, about detecting impairment. Rather, it serves as a risk mitigation tool, providing an objective measure to reinforce an employee's AOD testing policy. Another major challenge is medicinal cannabis, the argument between CBD and THC and that is having some significant impacts in the Australian workplace AOD testing at the current time.
Dr Geraldine M. Dowling SFHEA:What are the ethical dilemmas around CBD, THC or in forensic workplace drug testing?
Steve Korkoneas:Individuals are aware of the company's policy and procedure in regards to AD testing. If they choose not to follow these policy and procedures, there are consequences generally as you know. Unfortunately people do get terminated regarding an illicit positive but unfortunately that needs to occur to maintain safety in the work.
Dr Geraldine M. Dowling SFHEA:What advice would you give to someone entering the area of testing in forensic science?
Steve Korkoneas:Forensic toxicology should consider workplace drug testing field, Geraldine. I know it's not as sexy as other fields but please consider. Another one would be the undergraduate should consider forensic toxicology in regards to workplace drug testing. It is a very important field in keeping people safe at work and making sure they go home at the end of the shift.
Dr Geraldine M. Dowling SFHEA:Steve, what do you think is the biggest myth about toxicology?
Steve Korkoneas:Alcohol and other drug testing is all about impairment. It's not and it never has been.
Dr Geraldine M. Dowling SFHEA:If you weren't a forensic toxicologist, what would you be?
Steve Korkoneas:Retired on a Greek island having a ouzo and some calamari.
Dr Geraldine M. Dowling SFHEA:Oh, great choice. Do you have a final takeaway message for our listeners?
Steve Korkoneas:Yes, please consider AD testing as a risk mitigating tool only.
Dr Geraldine M. Dowling SFHEA:And Steve, where can the audience follow you or learn more and Steve, where can the audience follow you or learn more?
Steve Korkoneas:Please connect via LinkedIn. I'm known as Stavros Korkoneas, s-t-a-v-r-o-s, k-o-r-k-o-n-e-a-s, or reach out to me on stevekorkoneas@ gmailcom. Is there anything else you'd like to share with our listeners? Yes, thank you, Geraldine. I'm in the process of trying to organise an international workplace drug testing workshop at the upcoming meeting in Auckland. Watch this space for details.
Dr Geraldine M. Dowling SFHEA:Thank you so much, Steve, for sharing your valuable insights on workplace drug testing. Your experiences have been really, really interesting in our discussion today. It's been an enlightening chat and I really appreciate you joining us.
Steve Korkoneas:Thank you, Geraldine, for allowing me to present some issues and the pleasure was all mine. Hopefully, your listeners took something away from the podcast.
Dr Geraldine M. Dowling SFHEA:Thank you, Steve, and to our listeners, thank you for tuning in to an episode of the Analytical Zen Podcast. Be sure to join us next time and stay curious. Please connect on Linkedin.