Implementation Guidelines - Federal Transit Administration - U.S. ...

SAP, many employers have looked to their
EAPs for SAP services. On the surface, this
appears to be a wise decision. However,
many transit systems have found that an
EAP may not be the best environment to
find SAPs who are philosophically aligned
with DOT programs, and they may not be
the best location to house SAP services.
FTA audits frequently found that SAPs
in general misunderstand their role as the
gatekeeper of the return-to-duty process, and
therefore, compromise the integrity of the
process and public safety. This
misunderstanding is associated with the
philosophical misalignment of EAP
counselors and SAPs. EAP counselors are
often viewed as advocates for the employee
and as such, attempt to return employees
who have tested positive back to duty as
soon as possible. This approach is
consistent with the training that counselors
often receive that emphasizes getting the
person back into a stable work environment
as soon as possible, where they must be
accountable.
This philosophy, however, is contrary to
the basic premise upon which the SAP’s
function was established. Due to the safetysensitive
nature of the positions the
employees fill, the SAP should be very
conservative in his/her assessment of the
employee and the progress made in
education/treatment programs. “Putting in
the time” is simply not enough for an
individual returning to a safety-sensitive
position. Similarly, if the SAP rushes the
return-to-duty test, the employee may be
putting the public at risk. The SAP must not
release the individual to come back to work
until the SAP has a reasonable level of
assurance that the individual will stay drug
and alcohol free based on the individual’s
attitude, support structure, participation in
the treatment program, motivation, and
Chapter 9. Substance Abuse
Professionals, Rehabilitation, and
Treatment
demonstrated behavior changes. The SAP is
the advocate for the public interest, not the
employee.
Given this difference of philosophical
viewpoints, some transit systems have
chosen to separate the SAP function from
the EAP function. In the traditional role, the
EAP remains available to employees to help
them deal with issues in confidence and, if
needed, self refer to a treatment program for
drug or alcohol problems. The SAP does not
become involved unless there is a positive
test result or a test refusal on a DOT test.
However, if an FTA rule violation occurs,
the individual falls under the purview of the
SAP and must be subject to the
consequences and return-to-duty process
defined in the regulations that were
summarized previously in this chapter.
By separating the functions, the
credibility and effectiveness of the EAP
program as an employee benefit is not
compromised, and the seriousness and rigor
of the SAP process is not diluted.
Employees can better understand the roles of
the two entities rather than being confused
by one counselor that presents two different
approaches, standards of confidentiality, and
advocacy depending on whether they act as
the EAP counselor or the SAP gatekeeper.
If separation of the functions is not
possible, the SAP should be cautioned about
the difference of approach, philosophy, and
confidentiality that defines the two roles.
Employees should also be made aware of
the differences.
Self Referrals. One of the positive
outcomes of the FTA drug and alcohol
testing program is that it makes employees
aware of the effects and consequences of
prohibited drug use and alcohol misuse on
personal health, safety, and the work
9-8 August 2002