In a 4-3 decision, the Supreme Court of Ohio ruled in Lunsford v. Sterilite of Ohio, L.L.C., employees who sign consent forms authorizing “any testing necessary” but not specifically discussing direct observation testing, failed to state a claim for invasion of privacy. In the case, current and former employees of Sterilite brought an action for invasion of privacy against the employer and the administer of Sterilite’s drug-testing program alleging that a signed “Consent and Release” form did not specifically indicate that direct observation testing would be used. The ruling is a reminder to employers and at-will employees that two options exist where continued employment is predicated on random drug testing: proceed with the test or accept the consequences of refusal.
