In the aftermath of a serious workplace incident, one of the first questions regulators, coroners, and courts will ask is: what did the organisation do to prevent this? For incidents involving potential substance impairment, the answer to that question will be found — or not found — in your testing records.

Due diligence is not a vague aspiration. Under Australian work health and safety legislation, officers of a person conducting a business or undertaking (PCBU) have a positive duty to exercise due diligence. This means taking reasonable steps to acquire and maintain knowledge of WHS matters, understand the nature and operations of the business, ensure the business has appropriate resources to manage risks, and verify that those resources are being used effectively.

Drug and alcohol testing records, when properly maintained, are among the most powerful forms of evidence that these obligations are being met.

What Due Diligence Requires

The Work Health and Safety Act 2011 (and its state and territory equivalents) sets out the due diligence obligations of officers. In the context of drug and alcohol testing, due diligence requires that officers can demonstrate:

• Knowledge of the risk. The organisation identified substance impairment as a workplace hazard and assessed the level of risk it presents.
• A control measure was implemented. A drug and alcohol testing program was established as a control measure to eliminate or minimise the risk.
• The control measure was resourced. Adequate budget, personnel, equipment, and technology were allocated to implement the program effectively.
• The control measure was implemented. The program was not just designed — it was actively conducted according to its stated parameters.
• The control measure was monitored. The program’s effectiveness was reviewed, and adjustments were made where necessary.

Your testing records are the evidence for points three, four, and five. Without them, the organisation’s claim of due diligence is an assertion without proof.

How Testing Records Demonstrate Due Diligence

Proof of Program Implementation

Testing records prove that the program exists in practice, not just on paper. They demonstrate:

• The number and frequency of tests conducted
• The types of testing performed (random, for-cause, post-incident, pre-employment)
• The dates, times, and locations of testing
• The employees tested and the results obtained
• The actions taken in response to non-negative results

A policy without corresponding testing records is evidence of intention, not action. In a legal proceeding, the distinction matters enormously.

Proof of Consistency

Testing records demonstrate that the program was applied consistently over time and across the organisation. Consistency is a key element of fairness — and fairness is a key defence in unfair dismissal claims, discrimination complaints, and WHS prosecutions.

If records show that testing was conducted regularly, that selections were genuinely random, and that consequences were applied uniformly, the organisation is in a strong position. If records show that testing was sporadic, that certain employees or departments were exempt, or that consequences varied based on non-relevant factors, the position is significantly weaker.

Proof of Response

Records should demonstrate that the organisation responded appropriately to positive results. This includes:

• Documentation of the stand-down process
• Evidence of EAP referral
• Return-to-work agreements and monitoring records
• Disciplinary actions taken
• Confirmation testing and chain of custody documentation

An organisation that detects a positive result and takes no documented action is arguably in a worse position than one that does not test at all — it has identified a risk and failed to manage it.

Record Quality Requirements

Not all records are created equal. For testing records to serve as effective due diligence evidence, they must meet certain quality standards.

Completeness

Every test conducted must be recorded, including negative results. A record set that only captures positive results is incomplete and may lead to questions about whether testing was actually conducted as frequently as claimed.

Accuracy

Records must be factually correct. Employee names, dates, times, substances tested, and results must be accurate. Errors in testing records can undermine their evidentiary value and create doubt about the reliability of the entire program.

Timeliness

Records should be created at or near the time of the event they describe. A testing record created weeks or months after the test was conducted is less credible than one created on the same day. Digital testing platforms that capture data at the point of entry are inherently more reliable in this regard than manual systems.

Security

Testing records are confidential health information. They must be stored securely, with access restricted to authorised personnel. A record system that does not control access or maintain an audit trail of who viewed what and when is a privacy risk and a compliance gap.

Retention

Records must be retained for at least the period specified by relevant legislation and your organisation’s policy. In most Australian jurisdictions, WHS records must be retained for at least 30 years for health surveillance records. Check your specific obligations — the retention period may vary based on the type of record and the jurisdiction.

Common Gaps in Testing Records

Based on regulatory actions and Fair Work Commission decisions, the most common gaps in testing records include:

• Missing selection records — The test result is recorded, but there is no record of how or why the employee was selected. This makes it impossible to demonstrate that the selection was random.
• Incomplete chain of custody — For confirmed positive results, gaps in the chain of custody can render the result inadmissible.
• No record of employee notification — There is no documentation of when and how the employee was informed of the test requirement or the result.
• Missing for-cause documentation — A for-cause test was conducted, but the supervisor’s observation notes are missing or inadequate.
• Inconsistent record keeping — Different sites or testers use different formats, levels of detail, or record-keeping systems, making it difficult to aggregate or audit the data.

Audit Readiness

Due diligence is not something you demonstrate after an incident — it is something you maintain continuously. Your testing records should be audit-ready at all times. This means:

• Records are organised, indexed, and searchable
• Reports can be generated quickly for any date range, location, or employee
• The audit trail is intact — every record has a creation timestamp and an identifiable author
• Access logs are maintained and available

A digital testing management platform that captures data at the point of entry, maintains a complete audit trail, and allows instant report generation is the most effective way to maintain audit readiness.

Linking Records to WHS Outcomes

The most compelling due diligence evidence connects testing records to safety outcomes. Where possible, demonstrate:

• How the testing program has contributed to a reduction in incident rates
• How positive results were identified and managed before they could cause harm
• How trend analysis informed program adjustments that improved outcomes
• How the program’s deterrent effect is reflected in declining positive rates over time

This narrative transforms testing records from administrative documentation into a strategic safety asset.

Want testing records that prove your due diligence without any gaps? Start a free trial of FairTest and build a complete, audit-ready record of every test, selection, result, and action — automatically.