In 2004, at Caterpiller's Georgia plant, employee Smith was fired after being unable to provide a urine specimen:
Officials at Caterpillar's Georgia plant instituted random drug checks about a 1 1/2 years ago. When his turn came up, Smith says he knew he might have trouble. So he immediately drank 40 ounces of water provided by the company, to no avail.
Smith said the company suspended him the next day and let him go two weeks later for refusing to take the test. Smith said he offered to provide a hair sample for testing, but that the offer was rejected.
In an interesting turnabout, the recent news out of Georgia State is that the Chamber of Commerce supported enactment of law that allows shy bladder donors or anyone unable to provide a urine specimen, an alternative saliva test.
The 2004 Caterpiller Case versus employee Smith was finally settled out of court and the company insisted that the employee, as part of the settlement agreement, had to agree to a non-disclosure agreement about the case. So as a result, we don't know the outcome. But as a member of the IPA BOD at the time, i remember the public news about the case very well. So most of Georgia, i would think, must have known about the case as well since Caterpillar is one of their biggest employers.
I can't prove it, but the coincidence of this highly publicized 2004 Caterpillar case, and this year's Georgia's State law making alternative tests available seems to indicate that the paruresis community LOST THE 2004 BATTLE WITH CATERPILLER, BUT WON THE WAR OF PUBLIC OPINION.
I think we owe IPA and Smith a big debt of gratitude for this Georgia State law 3 years later.