An employer that uniformly enforces its policy on random drug tests can discharge a driver who refuses to immediately comply. On May 18, 2012 at 6:30 a.m., Paul Eiserman's employer informed the truck driver that he had been selected to undergo a random drug test, and that the test facility opened at 8 a.m. Allegedly, Eiserman, who had worked for the company for five years, drove home and fell asleep. He did not take the random drug test on May 18. Apparently, the employer requested that he undergo a random drug test on or about June 5, and Eiserman passed. On July 3, 2012, the employer discharged Eiserman, for refusal to take a random drug test on May 18. The union filed a grievance and argued that discharge was overly harsh, and the company should have issued a suspension. The collective bargaining contract provides, "Any `driver or applicant who engages in a Refusal to Submit . . . fails to report directly to the collection site after notification, or to delay [going to] the collection site after notification . . . will be discharged." Arbitrators found that the employer uniformly enforced its rule that drivers are required to immediately comply with any requests to undergo random drug tests. The employer had just cause to discharge. "[N]either the policy nor the applicable regulations," wrote arbitrators, "permit any leniency." Jay Sabin represented the employer, and Norman Zolot represented the union.