|  By JANIE SOUTHARD& TIMOTHY COX
 jsouthard@dailystandard.com
 
 tcox@dailystandard.com
 Celina City Schools board of education is involved in a civil 
                  lawsuit over the firing of a preschool bus driver who failed 
                  a random drug test.
 The board of education last week filed a lawsuit in Mercer County 
                  Common Pleas Court against the Ohio Association of Public School 
                  Employees (OAPSE), Local 457, which is the union that covers 
                  classified staff such as bus drivers, cafeteria workers and 
                  other non-teaching staff.
 The lawsuit follows a decision by board members to fire Michael 
                  Bullock, a Head Start bus driver who failed a random drug test 
                  and admitted to smoking marijuana. After the firing, the union 
                  brought in an arbitrator who decided that Bullock should be 
                  reinstated as a bus driver and said the board did not have just 
                  cause to fire him.
 Board members are asking in the suit that the arbitrator’s 
                  decision be vacated.
 School officials believe that — if allowed to stand — 
                  the arbitration decision would limit the district’s ability 
                  to enforce its drug-free workplace rules.
 School board member Joe Bath called the arbitration decision 
                  “ludicrous.” The decision essentially says the school 
                  district had no just cause to fire Bullock because the district 
                  had no proof that he was under the influence of marijuana while 
                  driving the bus.
 Arbitrator Janet Goulet’s June 7 decision also ordered 
                  the school board to give Bullock back pay and to wipe clean 
                  his disciplinary record regarding the positive drug test.
 “It also keeps (the board) from terminating or disciplining 
                  any employee in the future who fails a drug test. We felt we 
                  needed to make a stand. On advice of our attorney, we authorized 
                  him to file the case as a way of making a stand and putting 
                  an end to this whole thing,” said Bath, vice president 
                  of the board of education.
 Board member Ken Fetters said the matter is being handled by 
                  the school district’s attorney and declined comment on 
                  the issue.
 The difference between the board’s interpretation of the 
                  drug policy and Goulet’s decision appear to hinge on three 
                  words: “in the workplace.” Goulet said the school 
                  board has no rule in place prohibiting safety-sensitive employees 
                  from engaging in “off-duty drug and alcohol use.” 
                  Therefore, Goulet reasoned, to fire Bullock, the school board 
                  “must introduce evidence of impairment on the job in addition 
                  to the positive test result.”
 But the school board refused to reinstate Bullock following 
                  the June 7 decision, paving the way for the lawsuit. The school 
                  board’s attorney, Christian M. Williams, of the Cleveland 
                  law firm Pepple & Waggoner, says in court filings that Goulet 
                  failed to properly do her job as an arbitrator.
 Rather than determining if Bullock violated a rule of the board 
                  of education, Williams wrote that Goulet “instead dispensed 
                  her own brand of industrial justice.”
 Abiding by the terms of the arbitration agreement would essentially 
                  create a new agreement between the school board and union, Williams 
                  said. “Arbitrator Goulet exceeded her powers as arbitrator 
                  ... under Ohio law when she decided to ignore such language 
                  and come up with her own termination standard.”
 The lawsuit also charges that Goulet’s decision does not 
                  take into account federal rules regarding commercial driver’s 
                  license holders, who can be disciplined or fired for positive 
                  drug tests.
 Goulet is an economics professor at Wittenberg University. She 
                  serves as an arbitrator at the request of the State Employee 
                  Relations Board and the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service. 
                  Attempts by The Daily Standard to reach Goulet to discuss her 
                  arbitration decision were unsuccessful.
 Celina schools Superinten-dent Fred Wiswell is out of the office 
                  this week and could not be reached for comment.
 OAPSE Local 457 President Carol Henderson, who also is a bus 
                  driver, did not return messages left at her home Wednesday.
 The school district’s legal saga began after Bullock was 
                  ordered on Nov. 4, 2002, to report to Gateway for random drug 
                  testing. Four days later, Head Start Executive Director Carol 
                  Davis was informed that Bullock’s test came back positive 
                  for marijuana. Davis then told Bullock not to report to work 
                  and informed him he could challenge the original test, but Bullock 
                  declined, court records say.
 At a special board meeting Nov. 25, 2002, board members terminated 
                  Bullock based on the drug test and his own explanation at the 
                  meeting that he “had consumed so much alcohol” the 
                  weekend before the aforementioned drug test, that he “blacked 
                  out and therefore did not know if he had smoked marijuana.”
 Bullock, who drove routes involving 30 to 40 preschoolers, did 
                  not deny he had smoked marijuana and did not deny the validity 
                  of the drug screen result.
 According to information culled from several Web sites, marijuana 
                  can remain detectable in the body for 20 to 90 days, depending 
                  on the potency of the drug and the frequency of use.
 The local union’s grievance claims the termination violated 
                  two articles of the negotiated agreement between the union and 
                  the school board — one saying there must be written warnings 
                  before termination and another saying drug use or possession 
                  cannot occur “in the workplace.”
 The words “in the workplace” have caused much debate 
                  about drug testing in recent years. An April 2002 Daily Standard 
                  story on local drug testing noted the American Civil Liberties 
                  Union (ACLU) largely follows Goulet’s line of thinking 
                  that a positive drug test does not necessarily mean a person 
                  is under the influence. The argument has been the basis of several 
                  ACLU lawsuits involving drug testing.
 “Such tests are unnecessary because they cannot detect 
                  impairment and, thus, in no way enhance an employer’s 
                  ability to
 evaluate or predict job performance,” an ACLU position 
                  paper on the issue states.
 What remains unclear about the school district’s lawsuit 
                  is when and how school board members decided to proceed with 
                  formal legal action.
 Fetters told The Daily Standard that board members agreed to 
                  file the lawsuit during a special meeting “a long, long 
                  time ago.” Fetters said no one from the media or public 
                  attended the session.
 District Treasurer Mike Marbaugh, who keeps the minutes of board 
                  meetings, said the board met in executive session with legal 
                  counsel to discuss the arbitration issue and ongoing contract 
                  negotiations with the union. The attorney urged action and board 
                  members agreed by consensus, although no formal vote was held, 
                  Marbaugh said.
 “My understanding was that we were giving it over to the 
                  attorney to deal with,” Fetters said.
 Public bodies are prohibited from making decisions in private 
                  executive sessions. They may discuss certain issues privately 
                  but any decisions are to be made in front of the public, according 
                  to Ohio’s Sunshine Law.
 |