Managing alcoholism at work

and co-workers.
These people are the ones who bear the brunt of the alcoholism and often pay the price for the alcoholic’s behaviour.
For employers, this price tag is more than just an emotional one. In the United States alone, the cost of alcoholism in the workplace ranges from US$33 billion to US$68 billion a year, thanks to on-the-job injuries, lost productivity, absenteeism and other factors.
Alcoholism in the workplace has a profound impact on safety and productivity.
Most heavy and binge drinkers have jobs, with more than 60 percent employed as full-time workers.
Common problems associated with alcohol that are on the increase at workplaces include employees arriving with alcohol on their breath, employees consuming alcohol during working hours and employees missing days at work without justification, or with lame and feeble excuses.
In other instances employee slip out during lunch break “for a quick one”, all this seems to be a problem which is on the increase resulting in problems for the employer.
Firstly, this type of behaviour constitutes misconduct and I trust that all employers have a company policy in place that has been communicated to all employees.
This has the duty of regulating the consumption of alcohol on company premises, and also off company premises, where it might impact adversely on the employer, the employee or the employee’s ability to perform his duties.
It’s a fact that not every rule has to be written down, on the basis that some rules are so well known that they do not have to be put in writing.
It will, however, greatly complicate matters if there are no such rules in the workplace and it will make for much smoother sailing if the rules are in place. So let’s just accept and apply the principle that “if it is forbidden, then put it in writing”.
It would be sufficient for the employee to be in that situation where his abilities have been impaired, where his sense of judgment and reactions or other faculties have been affected, or where there is a visible effect on his behaviour that would not normally be the case if he were sober.
The degree of drunkenness must be tested and employers are permitted to ask the employee to submit to a breathalyser test or to a blood test.
Obviously, the blood test can only be done under the supervision of or by a medically qualified person.
A refusal by the employee to undergo any such tests uld be seen as an aggravating factor because the employee is, in fact, being offered an opportunity to prove his innocence.
The employee’s consent to undergo either test must be obtained in writing and the employee is entitled to have a representative present to witness the procedure.
The employer should also have another person present to witness the procedure on behalf of the employer.
In addition to the test, the employer must make a note of the employee’s general appearance, general attitude, e.g. are the eyes bloodshot, is the speech slurred, is the employee unsteady on his feet, carry out the “white line test” and so on.
All these observations must be reduced to writing and signed both by the observer and the observer’s witness.
The establishment of a blood-alcohol content that is above the legal limit is not, in itself, sufficient evidence to dismiss the employee, as was the case with Hondo v Zesa (Supreme Court case).
The other factors must be established as well as whether or not the employee is able or unable to perform his or her tasks to the required standard and the level of danger to life or the employer’s property should the employee be allowed to continue working, as well as the effect on the rest of the employees should this employee be allowed to continue working in an “imbibed” state.
Generally, if a person’s drinking habit has an adverse effect on his home or work life, then that person can be said to have a drinking problem.
I am more concerned with the problem affecting the workplace and if the employee’s output in terms of quantity or quality is affected or his attendance record deteriorates or his use of sick leave becomes more frequent, and then be warned – there is a problem.
There has been some argument on whether the problem is classified as misconduct or as incapacity – the employee is rendered incapable of performing his duties due to the alcohol problem. In my view, it could be either.
The fact is that what the employer is faced with is a non-performing employee who has a problem that is seriously impacting adversely on the employer’s business, and which is costing the employer money and all of which the employer is not responsible for.
Remember that the important thing here is not to diagnose whether the employee is an alcoholic or not, you only have to know that the employee’s drinking habits are impacting adversely on the workplace.
That knowledge is sufficient to justify the employer taking action. The person with a drinking problem is an expert at hiding the problem.
He will go out of his way to “act sober”. He will be extremely co-operative, willing to undertake any task given to him, even if it is outside the general parameters of his job description.
There will also be frequent absences from the work-station, with dozens of different excuses to justify this weak bladder or bladder infection, upset stomach, bad headache, and so on. These absences are of course “drink breaks”.
Very often the problem is compounded because the employee’s immediate supervisor, while suspecting that “something is going on”, very often ignores his suspicions, overlooks the frequent absences for a day or even two days at a time.
He also ignores other warning signals that the employee’s absence always occurs on a Monday, and that he is never available for Saturday overtime.
Co-workers often will cover up for the errant employee, making excuses for him when his absence is questioned by the supervisor and not realising that by covering up they are, in fact, making his problem worse.
Whatever the case, the problem must not be overlooked. It is one of those problems that cannot be treated gently.
The problem is serious and must be seriously addressed. People who are alcoholics rarely recover without outside help.
With your encouragement and support, your employee may be able to get the help he or she so desperately needs.
l Taurai Musakaruka is Human Resources Practitioner: Feedback e-mail to [email protected]