NEED HELP - ASAP!!!! What if EE refuses to go for an alcohol test

lrenoll

I have a situation right now where a supervisor has smelled alcohol on an employee. She just infomred me today (that is another issue I plan on addressing) of this. The EE does not smell of it at this current writing. Our attorney has advised that the next time the supervisor smells this on the employee that we should immediately take the EE for testing. One question I missed asking him is ... what if she refuses? Our drug and alcohol policy is old, so it does not give any retributions for refusal to agree to a test. HELP! She apparently has come back from lunch smelling of alcohol.

AnaFL

Hi Irenoll

I think you should first of all update your drug-free workplace policy right away, and provide training to all employees, and have them sign a form saying they received training and understand it. We are a drug-free workplace too and have a comprehensive policy which addresses all those issues in writing (including what happens if they refuse to go for testing, be it post-offer, random or reasonable suspicion) and we have forms that employees must sign. We provide annual refresher training on our drug-free workplace policy to all employees as well, so that should a situation like that come up, there are no excuses as to what exactly is expected of them.

Unless the employee is in a safety sensitive position, I would be cautious about doing reasonable suspicion testing unless my policy was well written and administered, including current employee training. We have had this happen at our plant in the past, and the employee was tested right away and did test positive, and then since our policy states that a first offense requires EAP sessions (mandatory) plus two years of testing (every time we do randoms), that's what we did.

Good luck!

Hatchetman

[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 04-18-02 AT 01:14PM (CST)[/font][p]While I can't speak specifically to your state's law addressing a "drug/alcohol-free workplace," if it has one, you don't need to have a test. The observations of the supervisor or any other responsible person who is aware of how "being under the influence of alcohol" is usually demonstrated by an indidviual or in particular maybe this individual can attest to the smell of alcohol and the aberrant or unusual behavior that is associated with it -- slurred speech, incoherency, staggered gait, bloodshot eyes, unsteadiness, etc. Also, perhaps there is sleepiness or a lack of alertness and failure to perform work or to work in a steady manner.

Of course, some of this may have to be observed by the supervisor or other individuals for a period to ensure that there is something going on. Also, if possible, the employee needs to be talked to at that point as to what is going on if there is unusual performance or conduct (of course, the observations continue during the conference).

In short, a knowledgeable lay person (or two) can attest to the impairment coupled with the smell of alcohol in a situation that is unusual for the employee to lead one to believe the employee is intoxicated on the job.

WOCO Frank

In Missouri, you can terminate an employee for refusing a test, but their refusal does not disqualify them from receiving unemployment benefits. The level of evidence needed for that is so high, that it typically requires lab results. That's our Catch-22... without the lab results, the state typically weighs in on the side of the employee.