LabCorp to buy rival Medtox for $245 million

On June 4 it was reported that lab-testing company Laboratory Corp of America Holdings (LH.N) will buy smaller rival Medtox Scientific Inc. (MTOX.O) for $27 a share, or about $245 million, in cash.

The deal, which represents a premium of 37 percent over Medtox’s Friday close of $19.70, has been approved by the boards of both companies and is expected to close in the third quarter of 2012.

“This acquisition provides a strong foundation for growth in (the specialized toxicology testing) business, as we build and expand LabCorp’s toxicology center of excellence,” Laboratory Corp’s CEO David King said in a statement.

LabCorp with annual earnings of about $6-billion, saw their shares trading at $82.80 in early morning trade Monday on the New York Stock Exchange. Read more

Change is Good! Good Changes Are Even Better!

We have finally made it to June and so many changes have taken place over the last year with surprisingly, so few bumps in the road, so to speak. Since early 2011 we have implemented more new and exciting programs and productivity improvements than over the previous 15 years. One has to wonder what we were doing prior to this. All these changes have been both enlightening and rewarding for the staff and we believe more importantly, a benefit to our valuable clients. Here is just a short list of things we have implemented over the last two years and believe us, the changes are paying off. Read more

More Truckers And Other ‘Safety Sensitive’ Workers’ Testing Positive For Drugs

Just as the news of a Jet Blue pilot going off the deep end hit the news with the cause described as a “medical condition,” a recent survey from Quest Diagnostics, released in late March concluded that “truck drivers, pilots, rail operators and bus drivers federally mandated to be randomly drug and alcohol tested are testing positive for drugs more often, especially for cocaine and amphetamines.” Read more

Click it or Ticket

May is National Click it or Ticket month and the California Office of Traffic Safety would like to remind you of the importance of buckling up when you hit the road.  Taking a couple of seconds to buckle your seat belt will not only save you the trouble and hassle of a ticket and the fine that comes along with it, but more importantly, it could save your life and the lives of your loved ones.  Seat belts account for saving more lives than any other countermeasure. Read more

AADT Release’s Dual Language Driver Handbook

After almost six-months of collaborations with Buckley Productions and some serious translations and layout challenges, we have finally completed this project and the new English/Spanish employee handbooks for drug and alcohol testing are available for sale. Read more

Oregon Jury Renders $5.2M Verdict against Truck Broker and Driver in Negligent Hiring Case

A landmark decision against a trucking brokerage company for negligent hiring, an Oregon jury returned a verdict of nearly $5.2 million, including punitive damages, to the family of a man killed by a commercial truck.

Medford, Ore.—Handing down a decision that carries serious implications to organizations that hire trucking companies, a jury there in early March returned a verdict of nearly $5.2 million to the family of a man killed by a tractor/trailer in 2008. Linhart v. Heyl Logistics LLC, et al., Case No. 10-03100 (D. Or. Judge Panner, Docket No. 230). Attorneys for plaintiff Kelly Linhart argued successfully that trucking broker Heyl Logistics failed to perform due diligence when it hired Washington Transportation to haul goods for bottled water giant Nestle Waters North America. Read more

DOT and Medical Marijuana DOT ODAPC NOTICE

In late 2009, the Department of Justice (DOJ) issued guidelines for Federal prosecutors in states that have enacted laws authorizing the use of “medical marijuana.” Also see this link: Read more

DOT-FMCSA Files Criminal Action Against TPA for Fraud

On January 17, 2012, a man residing in South Burlington Vermont pleaded guilty in U.S. District Court in Brattleboro, Vermont, to making a false statement on a matter within the jurisdiction of the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) in relation to a scheme to defraud transportation companies employing drivers subject to random drug testing. Read more

Random Notifications Should Be Considerate of Driver’s After Hours Commitments

Scheduling random tests for your drivers close to quitting time can be unfair to the driver. What if the employer knows ahead of time that a driver has a part-time job or has to pick-up kids from daycare and starts at 5:30 p.m. every day Monday-Friday? The employer schedules a random test for 4:00 p.m., and the driver’s quitting time is 4:30 p.m., that’s not enough time with delays from traffic to work-loads at collection sites. Employers should be sensitive to a drivers personal comments. Read more

AADT Counsel Sends Letter to Competitor

On or around July of 2010, we received a number of complaints about a company making deceptive claims to our clients about drug and alcohol testing services.

On the third compliant, we notified our legal counsel and instructed them to send a letter of notice to the company back East, I believe from Connecticut that threatened legal action. Read more

Companies Using Aggressive Marketing Tactics To Sell Services

Updated by DOT On: 12/1/2011

In recent months, the DOT has received numerous inquiries and complaints regarding companies using aggressive marketing tactics to sell supervisor training to employers who may be subject to the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration’s drug and alcohol testing requirements. Please note that the FMCSA is not familiar with these companies or the training they are offering. Read more

Professional Adherence to the Intent of the Regulations: Test or Good Bye

On Thursday, December 29, AADT Customer Service Manager sent AADT Executive Director this email:


We have an owner-operator (O-O) that we are not renewing for 2012 per our policy. The client had been selected once in 2010 and again in 2011, and both times failed to respond to the random request to test, which included 3 follow-up notices for each selection. When the client called to renew and was asked about this, he stated that there was a change of address, but we found it funny that the client had received his 2011 Certificate for enrollment and the renewal documents for both 2011 and 2012 at the address we have in the system. Plus, at no time did the client make any attempt to send us a new address, which is all clearly outlined in of our service agreement. I notified the O-O that we would not be renewing his agreement for 2012.

I have attached our O-O Service Agreement in which Part 2, Section 5, clearly spells out the responsibilities of the O-O. This is also reaffirmed in the agreement acceptance statement. The company service agreement has identical language. Read more