---
url: 'https://www.fmjlaw.com/employer-faces-liability-under-minnesotas-drug-testing-law-datwa-after-a-different-employers-drug-test/'
title: 'Employer Faces Liability Under Minnesota’s Drug Testing Law (DATWA) After a Different Employer’s Drug Test'
author:
  name: Adam
  url: 'https://www.fmjlaw.com/author/adam-brownfmjlaw-com/'
date: '2026-06-12T16:15:20+00:00'
modified: '2026-06-12T16:20:35+00:00'
type: post
summary: 'Employers face potential liability when terminating employees based on drug testing information, even when the employer did not administer the test.'
categories:
  - Article
  - Thought Leadership
tags:
  - DATWA
  - Minnesota Drug and Alcohol Testing in the Workplace Act
  - Minnesota Drug Testing
  - Minnesota employment law
  - Minnesota Employment Law Firm
  - Minnesota Employment Lawyer
published: true
---

# Employer Faces Liability Under Minnesota’s Drug Testing Law (DATWA) After a Different Employer’s Drug Test

Minnesota employers should be aware of the risks associated with employee drug testing and disciplinary decisions involving positive drug test results. A recent federal court decision interpreting Minnesota’s Drug and Alcohol Testing in the Workplace Act (“DATWA”), codified at Minn. Stat. § 181.951 et seq., highlights the potential liability employers may face when terminating employees based on drug testing information, even when the employer did not administer the test.

## Kubat v. Pomp’s Tire Service

Minnesota’s DATWA provides protections for employees who are required to be tested for drugs or alcohol and requires strict adherence with certain procedures. In *[Kubat v Pomp’s Tire Service, Inc.](https://hr.cch.com/ELD/KubatPomps051926052026.pdf)*, No. 25-3478 (D. Minn. May 19, 2026), a federal judge declined to dismiss claims against an employer and reasoned that termination of an employee for testing positive on a drug test administered by a *different *employer violated Minnesota law. 

The decision in *Kubat* followed a motion to dismiss claims against Pomp’s for violation of DATWA. The Plaintiff, Kubat, drove a pickup truck for Pomp’s. Kubat applied for a job as a driver with a second employer but tested positive on a drug test and did not get the job. For some reason, Kubat informed Pomp’s of his positive drug test. Pomp’s terminated his employment as a result.

## Minnesota Employers Should Proceed Carefully with Drug Testing and Employee Discipline

DATWA prohibits employers from discharging an employee for a positive test result unless the result is verified by a confirmatory test. DATWA also requires employers to offer drug counseling or rehabilitation to employees testing positive for the first time and if the employee successfully completes treatment the employer must allow them to return to work.

Pomp’s argued that DATWA states, in part, that only “an employer who **requests or requires** an employee or job applicant to undergo drug or alcohol testing” must follow the protocols in the Act, citing Minn. Stat. § 181.951, Subd. 1. The Court held, however, that “it is not clear from the text of the Drug Testing Act that an employer may discharge an employee without complying with § 181.953, Subd. 10 simply because the test was administered by a different entity.” It noted that Section 181.953 subdivision 10 “states simply” that “an employer may not discharge, discipline, or discriminate against . . . an employee on the basis of a positive test result from an initial screening test that has not been verified by a confirmatory retest.”

This case involved unusual facts and may not represent how every judge or court would analyze a similar situation. A different court could have viewed the employee’s disclosure as an admission of drug use rather than discipline based on a drug test result. Discipline based on an admission without testing normally does not invoke the protections of DATWA. Nevertheless, strange facts make strange law, and the *Kubat *decision demonstrates how broadly DATWA protections may be interpreted in certain circumstances. 

## Drug Testing Law in Minnesota is Complex

Minnesota drug testing law is nuanced, and DATWA is a complicated statute. Non-compliance can lead to liability for lost wages, emotional distress, and attorney’s fees. The *Kubat *decision is based on odd circumstances, but it is an important reminder that employers in Minnesota need to tread very carefully whenever testing employees for drugs or alcohol, and even when discharging or disciplining an employee for use of drugs or alcohol without testing. Ultimately, Minnesota employers should seek legal guidance before taking adverse action based on drug or alcohol testing results (regardless of where the testing occurs) or with employee admissions involving substance use. 

If you have questions about testing or other employment law issues, please reach out to [John Ella](https://www.fmjlaw.com/professional/v-john-ella/) or the rest of our [HR & Employment Law Practice Group](https://www.fmjlaw.com/practice-area/hr-employment/) at FMJ Law.

[](https://www.addtoany.com/add_to/facebook?linkurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.fmjlaw.com%2Femployer-faces-liability-under-minnesotas-drug-testing-law-datwa-after-a-different-employers-drug-test%2F&linkname=Employer%20Faces%20Liability%20Under%20Minnesota%E2%80%99s%20Drug%20Testing%20Law%20%28DATWA%29%20After%20a%20Different%20Employer%E2%80%99s%20Drug%20Test)[](https://www.addtoany.com/add_to/twitter?linkurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.fmjlaw.com%2Femployer-faces-liability-under-minnesotas-drug-testing-law-datwa-after-a-different-employers-drug-test%2F&linkname=Employer%20Faces%20Liability%20Under%20Minnesota%E2%80%99s%20Drug%20Testing%20Law%20%28DATWA%29%20After%20a%20Different%20Employer%E2%80%99s%20Drug%20Test)[](https://www.addtoany.com/add_to/email?linkurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.fmjlaw.com%2Femployer-faces-liability-under-minnesotas-drug-testing-law-datwa-after-a-different-employers-drug-test%2F&linkname=Employer%20Faces%20Liability%20Under%20Minnesota%E2%80%99s%20Drug%20Testing%20Law%20%28DATWA%29%20After%20a%20Different%20Employer%E2%80%99s%20Drug%20Test)[](https://www.addtoany.com/add_to/linkedin?linkurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.fmjlaw.com%2Femployer-faces-liability-under-minnesotas-drug-testing-law-datwa-after-a-different-employers-drug-test%2F&linkname=Employer%20Faces%20Liability%20Under%20Minnesota%E2%80%99s%20Drug%20Testing%20Law%20%28DATWA%29%20After%20a%20Different%20Employer%E2%80%99s%20Drug%20Test)