RANDOM DRUG TESTS WELCOMED
NEW BEDFORD, Mass.
May 21, 1998
By David Rising, Standard-Times staff writer

Police seem generally happy with their new four-year union contract, which includes a provision for random drug and alcohol testing of officers.

New Bedford is the first city in the commonwealth to adopt such a measure.

Beginning their evening shifts yesterday afternoon, some officers declined comment, but those who spoke seemed unfazed by the prospect of random testing.

"I don’t do drugs, so it doesn’t bother me," said one officer, who didn’t give her name.

Another said he had voted against the contract because it "took too much power from the union," but was only against the random drug testing because he didn’t think it necessary.

"I don’t think they had to put it in the contract," he said. "I would have taken a test anyway, anytime anyone asked. I don’t have anything to hide."

The four-year contract, among other things, gives police three raises that total about 13 percent. Officers will also receive a $400 lump-sum payment, in lieu of any increase in their base pay over the last two years.

Officers who test with a blood alcohol level of .02 or more will be suspended for 30 days without pay and have to go into a 12-month treatment program. During that period, if they test positive again, they will be suspended for 90 days without pay. If they test positive a third time, they will be terminated.

New Bedford Police Union President William Stowell said he was sure the clause was a "bone of contention" for some officers, but believed it good to have on the books.

"Can you honestly think of an argument against it?" he asked.

Officer Stowell said the testing provision will help the department’s image.

"I believe 100 percent it does, and the officers I talked to also think that," Officer Stowell said. "How can you hurt your image by having a random drug testing policy? If we came up and said we don’t want a random drug policy, I think the public is going to assume that we’re trying to hide something."

In last year’s Bratton Report, which studied the New Bedford Police Department in detail, the authors reported that survey returns showed 20.4 percent of officers believed that some officers were taking drugs and or money from drug dealers.

Officer Herb Souza, secretary of the Fairhaven branch of the International Brotherhood of Police Officers, Local 381, said Fairhaven police had a drug-testing clause in their contract, but only in cases of probable cause.

Given the Bratton Report findings, however, Officer Souza said the random testing policy was probably a good idea for New Bedford.

"I don’t think the union (in Fairhaven) would go for it; I think the clause we have covers it, but we don’t have the suspicion that they did in New Bedford," he said. "If they accepted it, it’s because they thought they needed it."

Marion Police Brotherhood Vice President Craig Parker said his organization had actually proposed random drug testing for the Marion force, but had it struck down by the town during contract negotiations.

"We said we really didn’t have a problem with it, but said we would like to see it in all the other town union contracts also," Officer Parker said. "The Fire Department, the Department of Public Works, Town Hall workers— and department heads—and all of a sudden (the proposal) came to a screeching halt."

In general, Officer Parker said, he thought random testing was a good idea.

"It increases the level of public confidence in you, and these days in police work, we need all the public confidence we can get. Police take a lot of bashing, and I think this will help the image."

John J. Bellizzi, executive director of the International Narcotic Enforcement Officers Association, said he knew of other departments— local and federal—that had random testing written into their contracts.