I'd like to offer some information around how my company approach this topic; it is by no means perfect, but I think we are doing a good job and always looking to improve. Drug and alcohol testing has always been a bit of an ethical conundrum for our lead team; we want our people to be able to conduct their work without being negatively influenced by substances (and this is legal or otherwise), but we also don't want to dictate the choices people make in their own time. Being in the construction and utility sector, drug and alcohol testing is a focus for many hiring clients and random testing is expected. With the recent release of an oral fluid testing standard, we have amended our approach to oral fluid to try and better infer impairment at the time of an incident or while at work in general.There are still shortfalls with this approach but we feel this is a better way forward than urine testing in most cases. Our random testing programme includes all staff, including our GM and SDMs. Following on from that, as someone has mentioned already, substance abuse is an issue in itself and whether someones impairment has specifically led to/had potential to lead to an incident or not, once we learn someone may need support, we feel it is our responsibility to offer the resources we have on hand. We have a rehabilitation programme that employees can choose to participate in. As well as this, we provide support and information to our teams so that they have as much as information as we can provide to make informed decisions about their own health. We try and take a holistic approach to this topic and are aware that there isn't a one size fits all. With advances in impairment testing options, we are starting to feel a little more comfortable but for us, it's really about understanding what has led to someone being impaired at work, can we do anything to support, and if not, what are the impacts of this. I hope this sheds a little positive spin on the topic. Cheers.