Committee advances criteria-based employer substance-testing rules after analyst-led redraft

The Labor Committee voted to pass LD2110 as amended, adopting drafting revisions from the Department of Labor and the committee analyst that replace imprecise terms such as "arbitrary" with "criteria‑based testing," add a definition for random testing, and refine employer notice and medical review procedures.

The analyst explained that the green-highlighted changes in the draft incorporate recommendations from a recent bill analysis and conversations with the Department of Labor. Key changes include: requiring department approval of employer testing programs; replacing the phrase "arbitrary testing" with "criteria-based testing" to better match intended triggers for tests; adding an explicit definition for random testing; restoring language that requires employers to provide applicants a copy (not merely an opportunity to review) of a written testing policy; and clarifying that specimens must be collected by "qualified" (rather than solely "certified") individuals.

"The department agreed that it would make more sense to just strike the note. So the sentence would read: approval of the department is required," the analyst explained, summarizing one of the drafting fixes. The Bureau of Labor Standards director, Kate Burkhart, clarified that facilities are responsible for ensuring collectors are trained or qualified and that the Department of Health and Human Services no longer certifies phlebotomists.

The committee also agreed to a grammatical fix supplied by the joint standing committee on judiciary (an errors-bill amendment) that refines the statutory cross-reference about when blood sampling may be used for certain substances.

Representative Scold moved to pass the measure as amended with the green-highlighted language; the motion passed by unanimous roll call of members present. The committee directed staff to send the finalized language to the revisors' office and noted that the Department of Labor and stakeholders had reviewed the redraft during the housekeeping process.

Next steps include revisor review and placement on the calendar for further floor consideration. The committee asked staff to preserve the intent of the drafting changes (department approval, clarified definitions, and revised collection/certification language) in final statutory text.