Dana was required by her employer to take a drug test after Dana reported work -related carpal tunnel syndrome Her employer had no reasonable basis for suspecting that drug use could have contributed to her condition, and it had no other reasonable basis for requiring her to take a drug test. Rather, her employer routinely subjects all employees who report work-related injuries to a drug test regardless of the circumstances surrounding the injury. The state workers compensation program applicable to the employer did not address drug testing, and no other state or federal law requires the employer to drug test employees who sustain injuries at work. Did the employer subject Dana to a drug test to retaliate against her for reporting a workplace injury?

Based on the information provided, it appears that Dana's employer required her to take a drug test after she reported work-related carpal tunnel syndrome. The key points to consider are:1. **Lack of Reasonable Basis**: There was no reasonable basis for suspecting that drug use contributed to her condition.2. **Routine Practice**: The employer has a routine practice of subjecting all employees who report work-related injuries to drug tests, regardless of the circumstances.3. **No Legal Requirement**: The state workers' compensation program and no other state or federal law requires the employer to drug test employees who sustain injuries at work.Given these points, it does not seem that the employer specifically targeted Dana for retaliation. Instead, the drug test appears to be part of a general policy applied to all injury reports. Retaliation would typically involve adverse action taken specifically because Dana reported the injury, which is not indicated here.Therefore, based on the given information, it does not appear that the employer subjected Dana to a drug test to retaliate against her for reporting a workplace injury. It was more likely a routine procedure mandated by the employer's policy.