The Union successfully argued that the Employer did not have the right to require the greivor to take a urine test pursuant to its substance use policy. The Arbitrator agreed with the Union that the Employer did not have reasonable grounds to insist on a urine test, including because there were no signs of impairment. The Arbitrator further agreed with the Union that whether it has grounds to demand a breath test (for alcohol), a urine test (for drug use), or both, must be considered by the Employer and it is not automatic that just because the Employer had reasonable grounds to demand a breath test, that it had grounds to demand a urine test.
View the case here.