Is Your Drug & Alcohol Policy Still Living in 2019? Why It's Time for an Update

This month, PCG Founder Jennifer Patterson joined a panel discussion on mitigating substance abuse risk in the workplace, hosted by USI – St. Louis during SAMHSA's National Prevention Week. The conversation covered everything from reasonable suspicion to return-to-work programs, and one theme kept surfacing: that most organizations' drug and alcohol policies haven't kept pace with how work happens today. Here's what employers need to know.

The 1998 Handbook Problem

Here's a true story: We recently started working with an organization whose employee handbook was written in 1998.

Let that sink in. That policy was created before the legalization movement, before remote work became mainstream, before "hybrid" was anything other than a type of car. And yet, this organization was still relying on it to guide decisions about its workforce in 2026.

They're not alone. A 2024 survey of employers found that over 37% hadn't updated their drug testing policy in more than a year or ever. Nearly a third said keeping their policy up to date was one of their biggest challenges.

That gap creates real risk.

What's Changed (And Why Your Policy Might Be Outdated)

If your drug and alcohol policy was written more than a few years ago, it likely doesn't account for:

The Legalization Shift

Medical marijuana has been around for a while, and recreational use is now legal in many states. This adds layers of complexity as employers are trying to balance workplace safety with accommodation conversations. From an HR perspective, I always encourage employers not to treat medical marijuana situations as automatic disciplinary issues. Instead, slow down, involve HR, and evaluate the role and what protections might exist under state law.

But here's what hasn't changed: even if it's legal, employees cannot be impaired at work, just like alcohol.

Remote and Hybrid Work

Remote work has fundamentally changed enforcement. Managers aren't physically seeing employees the same way they would if everyone were on-site five days a week. That means employers need to focus less on trying to police people's home environments and more on workplace behavior, performance, and what can be observed during work hours.

The companies doing this well? They're training their leaders consistently.

The Shift from "Positive Test" to "Impairment"

Many organizations are moving away from marijuana testing for non-safety-sensitive positions, especially given hiring challenges. But in manufacturing, transportation, and other safety-focused environments, stricter policies still make sense.

What I'm observing across the board is that companies are shifting their focus away from just a positive test and toward recognizing impairment, which means reasonable suspicion training matters more than ever.

Key Policy Gaps to Look For

When we review handbooks and policies, here are the most common gaps we find:

• Does your policy address remote workers?If your entire drug and alcohol policy assumes everyone is working on-site, it doesn't reflect reality. How do you handle reasonable suspicion when you're managing someone through a screen?

  
  

• Does it focus on impairment vs. just positive tests?A positive test alone doesn't always tell the full story. With marijuana, someone could have used it 12 hours before work and during work hours. Your policy should address actual workplace impairment and give managers the tools to document observable behaviors.

  
  

• Does it include clear reasonable suspicion procedures?Reasonable suspicion should be based on specific, observable behaviors and not gut feelings. We're talking about coordination issues, smell of alcohol or marijuana, slurred speech, and erratic behavior that's different from someone's norm. Managers need to know what to look for, how to document it objectively, and when to involve HR rather than trying to diagnose impairment themselves.

  
  

• Does it address timing?This is one of the biggest training gaps I see. If there's truly a reasonable suspicion concern, employers need to act quickly. We don't want managers observing concerning behavior at 9 a.m. and waiting until the end of the shift to address it. That's often what happens, and they spend the day trying to figure out how to handle it instead of following the process immediately.

  
  

• Does it connect to your return-to-work program?Your drug and alcohol policy shouldn't exist in isolation. After an incident, there should be a clear process, and that includes how employees return to work, what retesting looks like, and how you communicate throughout.

The Real Risk: Inconsistency

Here's what I want every employer to understand. The risk isn't just in having a bad policy. It's in applying your policy inconsistently.

When managers aren't trained on the policy, or when they're trained once and then expected to remember it ten years later, you end up with emotional reactions instead of procedural responses. Different situations are handled differently. Documentation is vague or missing.

That inconsistency is where organizations get into trouble.

The fix? Treat this like a fire drill. You wouldn't expect employees to know exactly what to do in an emergency without practicing. The same applies here. Policies need to be trained on, practiced, and revisited, not just when someone gets hired, but regularly, especially as laws change and your workforce evolves.

Time to Take a Fresh Look

If your employee handbook, and specifically your drug and alcohol policy, hasn’t been updated in the last couple of years, now is the time.

Your policy needs to match how your employees are working today. It needs to give your managers confidence to act when something concerning happens. And it needs to be applied consistently, every time.

Whether your current handbook hasn't been touched in years or you're starting from scratch, PCG can help you create something that protects your business and guides your people.

Ready to update your handbook? Let's talk. →