In which scenario may a guard's drug test be considered unfair?

A guard's drug test may be considered unfair when it is based on "reasonable suspicion" without solid evidence. This is because "reasonable suspicion" implies that the decision to conduct a drug test stems from an assumption or belief that the individual is under the influence, rather than from clear, observable evidence. If there isn't concrete proof or a specific incident that justifies the suspicion, it can create an environment of mistrust and may lead to potential claims of discrimination or bias.

In contrast, drug tests that are conducted randomly are generally considered fair and within compliance as they are administered without bias and apply uniformly. Pre-employment drug testing is a common practice to ensure that candidates meet the company’s standards before being hired, which is widely accepted in many industries. Post-accident drug tests are also standard procedure, as they help determine if substance use contributed to the incident. These testing scenarios are established practices aimed at promoting safety and accountability, which is why they are usually not perceived as unfair.