Iowa House Bill HSB26

Iowa 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/15/25
• Refer: 1/15/25

Caption

A bill for an act concerning private sector employee drug testing.(See HF 767.)

Impact

By refining the existing Code section 730.5, HSB26 modifies how employers communicate test results to employees, allowing for notifications via electronic means or in-person exchanges, in addition to certified mail. The bill also introduces measures that stipulate the employer’s responsibility to confirm the validity of initial positive test results through a second confirmatory test, thereby providing a safeguard against erroneous conclusions regarding an employee's fitness for duty based on drug tests. If the confirmatory test returns negative, the initial positive result cannot be used against the employee for disciplinary actions.

Summary

House Study Bill 26 (HSB26) addresses the regulations surrounding private sector employee drug testing in Iowa. It aims to delineate the framework for drug testing protocols, specifically enhancing employee rights and establishing clear responsibilities for employers when it comes to notifying employees of test results. A significant focus of the bill is the definition of safety-sensitive positions, which includes jobs that could result in substantial danger if mishandled and those designated by employers as safety-sensitive, thereby holding them to stricter testing requirements.

Contention

While proponents advocate for the bill as a necessary update to ensure fairer treatment of employees and to address the evolving nature of communication technology in the workplace, critics may express concerns about the balance between ensuring workplace safety and protecting employee privacy. Questions arise regarding how these new guidelines might affect the implementation of drug testing in various sectors, particularly in industries with inherently higher risks. Moreover, the definition and identification of safety-sensitive positions remain contentious, as employers and employees may have differing interpretations, leading to potential disputes regarding testing requirements.