School Law Bulletin [serial] 18, 3 (Summer 1987)
![Cover School Law Bulletin [serial] 18, 3 (Summer 1987)](https://files.read-any-book.net/429147/files/school-law-bulletin-serial-18-3-summer-1987.jpg)
The book School Law Bulletin [serial] 18, 3 (Summer 1987) was written by author Here you can read free online of School Law Bulletin [serial] 18, 3 (Summer 1987) book, rate and share your impressions in comments. If you don't know what to write, just answer the question: Why is School Law Bulletin [serial] 18, 3 (Summer 1987) a good or bad book?
Where can I read School Law Bulletin [serial] 18, 3 (Summer 1987) for free?
In our eReader you can find the full English version of the book. Read School Law Bulletin [serial] 18, 3 (Summer 1987) Online - link to read the book on full screen. Our eReader also allows you to upload and read Pdf, Txt, ePub and fb2 books. In the Mini eReder on the page below you can quickly view all pages of the book - Read Book School Law Bulletin [serial] 18, 3 (Summer 1987)
In our eReader you can find the full English version of the book. Read School Law Bulletin [serial] 18, 3 (Summer 1987) Online - link to read the book on full screen. Our eReader also allows you to upload and read Pdf, Txt, ePub and fb2 books. In the Mini eReder on the page below you can quickly view all pages of the book - Read Book School Law Bulletin [serial] 18, 3 (Summer 1987)
What reading level is School Law Bulletin [serial] 18, 3 (Summer 1987) book?
To quickly assess the difficulty of the text, read a short excerpt:
In 1986, a federal court in the District of Columbia struck down a urinalysis program involving all transpor- tation department employees of the District's public school system.53 Two years earlier the school system had adopted a program requiring all transportation employees to sub- mit to urinalysis testing because of increased evidence of drug use among the employees. In a court hearing, the school system showed that the program was initiated be- cause traffic accidents and absenteeism had i...ncreased and because syringes and bloody needles were found in trans- portation employees' restrooms. A bus attendant who was discharged after testing positive challenged her dismissal as being based on an unreasonable search. Applying a prob- able cause standard, the court held that the urinalysis did constitute a search. It went on to hold that the search vio- lated the Fourth Amendment because of the lack of in- dividualized suspicion.
To date no cases have been reported that involve drug testing of public school athletes, although this practice is becoming increasingly common.^'' Some courts have al- lowed drug testing in pre-employment or annual employee physicals, particularly with individuals in hazardous jobs.'' But courts are increasingly invalidating random searches of employees if there is no reasonable suspicion that those tested are at present under the influence of a controlled substance.'* 52.
What to read after School Law Bulletin [serial] 18, 3 (Summer 1987)?
You can find similar books in the "Read Also" column, or choose other free books by Open Content Alliance to read onlineMoreLess
To quickly assess the difficulty of the text, read a short excerpt:
In 1986, a federal court in the District of Columbia struck down a urinalysis program involving all transpor- tation department employees of the District's public school system.53 Two years earlier the school system had adopted a program requiring all transportation employees to sub- mit to urinalysis testing because of increased evidence of drug use among the employees. In a court hearing, the school system showed that the program was initiated be- cause traffic accidents and absenteeism had i...ncreased and because syringes and bloody needles were found in trans- portation employees' restrooms. A bus attendant who was discharged after testing positive challenged her dismissal as being based on an unreasonable search. Applying a prob- able cause standard, the court held that the urinalysis did constitute a search. It went on to hold that the search vio- lated the Fourth Amendment because of the lack of in- dividualized suspicion.
To date no cases have been reported that involve drug testing of public school athletes, although this practice is becoming increasingly common.^'' Some courts have al- lowed drug testing in pre-employment or annual employee physicals, particularly with individuals in hazardous jobs.'' But courts are increasingly invalidating random searches of employees if there is no reasonable suspicion that those tested are at present under the influence of a controlled substance.'* 52.
What to read after School Law Bulletin [serial] 18, 3 (Summer 1987)?
You can find similar books in the "Read Also" column, or choose other free books by Open Content Alliance to read onlineMoreLess
Write Review:
Guest
Read Also
8 / 10
10 / 10
User Reviews: