Minnesota Statutes

Minn. Stat. § 181.950 (2026)

Definitions

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MN-REVrevisor.mn.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Subdivision 1.Applicability.

For the purposes of sections 181.950 to 181.957, the terms and phrases defined in this section have the meanings given them.

Subd. 2.Confirmatory test; confirmatory retest.

"Confirmatory test" and "confirmatory retest" mean a drug or alcohol test or cannabis test that uses a method of analysis allowed under one of the programs listed in section 181.953, subdivision 1.

Subd. 3.

[Repealed, 1991 c 60 s 12]

Subd. 4.Drug.

"Drug" means a controlled substance as defined in section 152.01, subdivision 4, but does not include marijuana, tetrahydrocannabinols, cannabis flower as defined in section 342.01, subdivision 16, cannabis products as defined in section 342.01, subdivision 20, lower-potency hemp edibles as defined in section 342.01, subdivision 50, and hemp-derived consumer products as defined in section 342.01, subdivision 37.

Subd. 5.Drug and alcohol testing.

"Drug and alcohol testing," "drug or alcohol testing," and "drug or alcohol test" mean analysis of a body component sample according to the standards established under one of the programs listed in section 181.953, subdivision 1, for the purpose of measuring the presence or absence of drugs, alcohol, or their metabolites in the sample tested. "Drug and alcohol testing," "drug or alcohol testing," and "drug or alcohol test" do not include cannabis or cannabis testing, unless stated otherwise.

Subd. 5a.Cannabis testing.

"Cannabis testing" means the analysis of a body component sample according to the standards established under one of the programs listed in section 181.953, subdivision 1, for the purpose of measuring the presence or absence of cannabis flower, as defined in section 342.01, subdivision 16, cannabis products, as defined in section 342.01, subdivision 20, lower-potency hemp edibles as defined in section 342.01, subdivision 50, hemp-derived consumer products as defined in section 342.01, subdivision 37, or cannabis metabolites in the sample tested. The definitions in this section apply to cannabis testing unless stated otherwise.

Subd. 6.Employee.

"Employee" means a person, independent contractor, or person working for an independent contractor who performs services for compensation, in whatever form, for an employer.

Subd. 7.Employer.

"Employer" means a person or entity located or doing business in this state and having one or more employees, and includes the state and all political or other governmental subdivisions of the state.

Subd. 8.Initial screening test.

"Initial screening test" means a drug or alcohol test or cannabis test which uses a method of analysis under one of the programs listed in section 181.953, subdivision 1.

Subd. 9.Job applicant.

"Job applicant" means a person, independent contractor, or person working for an independent contractor who applies to become an employee of an employer, and includes a person who has received a job offer made contingent on the person passing drug or alcohol testing.

Subd. 9a.Oral fluid test.

"Oral fluid test" means analysis of a saliva sample for the purpose of measuring the presence of the same substances as drug and alcohol testing and cannabis testing that:

(1) can detect drugs, alcohol, cannabis, or their metabolites in levels at or above the threshold detection levels contained in the standards of one of the programs listed in section 181.953, subdivision 1; and

(2) does not require the services of a testing laboratory under section 181.953, subdivision 1.

Subd. 10.Positive test result.

"Positive test result" means a finding of the presence of drugs, cannabis, alcohol, or their metabolites in the sample tested in levels at or above the threshold detection levels contained in the standards of one of the programs listed in section 181.953, subdivision 1.

Subd. 11.Random selection basis.

"Random selection basis" means a mechanism for selection of employees that (1) results in an equal probability that any employee from a group of employees subject to the selection mechanism will be selected and (2) does not give an employer discretion to waive the selection of any employee selected under the mechanism.

Subd. 12.Reasonable suspicion.

"Reasonable suspicion" means a basis for forming a belief based on specific facts and rational inferences drawn from those facts.

Subd. 13.Safety-sensitive position.

"Safety-sensitive position" means a job, including any supervisory or management position, in which an impairment caused by drug, alcohol, or cannabis usage would threaten the health or safety of any person.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 17 cases, 1990–2016 · leading case: Williams v. Nat'l Football League, 794 N.W.2d 391 (Minn. Ct. App. 2011).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Williams v. Nat'l Football League, 794 N.W.2d 391 (Minn. Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 5× “This is an appeal from the district court’s denial of permanent injunctive relief following a court trial of appellants’ claims under the Drug and Alcohol Testing in the Workplace Act (DATWA), Minn. Stat. §§ 181.950 -.957 (2010). Because we conclude that DATWA did not govern the…”

State v. Bloom, 516 N.W.2d 159 (Minn. 1994). · cites it 2× “With respect to quality control standards and procedures for testing laboratories, I believe that, at a minimum, laboratories conducting DNA testing should be required to comply with the standards and procedures required of laboratories conducting drug and alcohol testing under…”

Williams v. Nat'l Football League, 582 F.3d 863 (8th Cir. 2009). “” Minn.Stat. § 181.950 subdiv.7. An employee is "a person, independent contractor, or person working for an independent contractor who performs services for compensation, in whatever form, for an employer.”

Law Enf't Labor Servs., Inc. v. Sherburne Cnty., 695 N.W.2d 630 (Minn. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 4× “” Minn.Stat. § 181.950, subd. 13. The county’s policy identifies the following categories of employees as safety sensitive: jail personnel, patrol officers, investigators, the director of emergency management, and transport/court security deputies.”

Nichols v. State, 858 N.W.2d 773 (Minn. 2015). · cites it 2× “1(d) (2014) (leave to attend military ceremonies); Minn.Stat. § 181.950, subd. 7 (2014) (drug and alcohol testing); Minn.”

Richard S. Belde v. Ferguson Enter., Inc., Minnesota Transp. Servs. Ass'n, Amicus on Behalf Of, 460 F.3d 976 (8th Cir. 2006). · cites it 2× “Belde argues that FOTETA mandated his removal from the safety-sensitive driver position, but not his termination, and therefore termination violated his rights under the Minnesota Drug and Alcohol Testing in the Workplace Act (“DATWA”), Minn.Stat. §§ 181.950 et seq. Reviewing…”

Nichols v. State, Off. of the Sec'y, 842 N.W.2d 20 (Minn. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 2× “1(d) (leave for immediate family members to attend military send-off or homecoming ceremonies); Minn.Stat. § 181.950, subd. 7 (drug testing); Minn.”

Visnovec v. Yellow Freight Sys., Inc., 754 F. Supp. 142 (D. Minnesota 1990). · cites it 6× “That the cause of action of plaintiff alleging violations of Minn.Stat. § 181.950 through § 181.957 is preempted by Department of Transportation regulations at 49 C.”

Williams v. United Parcel Serv., Inc., 527 F.3d 1135 (10th Cir. 2008). “§ 17-214; Minn.Stat. § 181.950 et seq.; Miss.Code Ann.”

Shawn Olson v. Push, Inc., 640 F. App'x 567 (8th Cir. 2016). “Olson initially brought this action in Minnesota state court, alleging that Push had violated a provision of the Minnesota Drug and Alcohol Testing in the Workplace Act (DATWA), Minn.Stat. § 181.950 et seq. As relevant, DATWA prohibits an employer from terminating an employee…”

Nat'l Football League Players Ass'n v. Nat'l Football League, 654 F. Supp. 2d 960 (D. Minnesota 2009). · cites it 2× “Count XII asserts that Defendants violated Minnesota’s Drug and Alcohol Testing in the Workplace Act (“DATWA”), Minn. Stat. § 181.950 et seq., and Count XIII contends that Defendants violated Minnesota’s Consumable Products Act (“CPA”), Minn.”

Sipe v. STS Mfg., Inc., 822 N.W.2d 2 (Minn. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 3× “DATWA allows for damages when an employee or job applicant is “injured by [a] violation” of sections 181.950— .954; injunctive relief when an employer or laboratory has “committed] or propos[ed] to commit an act” violating sections 181.”

Show all 17 citing cases →

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.