Working while impaired

Kiwi

We had an ee this morning who stopped at our office briefly, then went to do his job which involves driving to see customers. The person he saw in his initial stop at the office calls the ee's mgr and says the ee smelled of alcohol. Unfortunately, the ee had just left. The mgr goes out to find the ee in the field, confirms the reasonable suspicion and takes ee for the alc test according to our policy. EE blew .10. Our policy calls for immediate termination in this case, but my HR Dir is concerned the ee can claim ADA protection and we'd have to work with him to get the ee help. Our policy says we will help ee's who ask for it before they are caught being bad. My view is ADA wouldn't be an issue since he was caught operating a company vehicle while legally intoxicated. Is my HR Dir too nervous or am I not nervous enough?

LarryC

ADA will protect recovering alcoholics, but not practicing alcoholics.

And I still say it is NOT a disease.

SMace

I'm no expert and I really don't have a strong opinion one way or the other, but I have a hard time believing that the people who drink themselves to death actually want to do that.

mwild31

Maybe I'm too simple, but if the ee came to me & said, "I'm an alcoholic and I need to seek treatment" then I would allow the ee to seek treatment, as the ADA protections would come into play. However, given your post and the information you provided, I don't think ADA would apply as the ee was performing their job, the supervisor, not the ee coming forward, determined there was reasonable suspicion and had the ee tested. In my opinion, the ee was "caught" and I would terminate if that's what your policy states.

Kiwi

mwild, your read is the same as mine in applying our policy. For some reason our HR Dir thinks that if the ee can get out 'I want help' before we get out 'you are very fired' that we must help the ee. That seemed perfect nonsense to me. I just wanted to check if I was being simple. x:D

marc

Agree with MWild and LarryC. This topic has been discussed a number of times in the past several months, so there are lots of posts available by doing the search.

But the essence is the recovering part of the treatment. If you think through it a bit, how would you accomodate the practicing alcoholic?

Balloonman1

Fire him!
My $0.02 worth,
DJ The Balloonman

Kiwi

He has been fired. As he was being driven home, he told his mgr that he knows it's all his fault and he enjoyed working for us. Said he knows he has issues he needs to address. I fervently hope he does address them.

Thanks for the input, forumaniacs. (I did get a good chuckle over the concept of accommodating a practicing alcoholic.. I don't think I'll run that by my HR Dir, though.)

pork1

KIWI: Glad to read the company stood by the company policy. If before the ee blows into the test tube, he/she says I have a problem and I need help you might be sympathetic; however, the current use theory is not protected by ADA.

Once caught and challenged in our policy, there is no room to wiggle and ask for help! The employee has the option to "voluntary quit" rather than undergo a legal test. To get to use the ADA protection in our program, one would have to have walked up to the first supervisor/manager and admit to drug or alcohol abuse and seek help, before the manager/supervisor smells anything or notices some strange behavior, slurded speech or dilated eyes, strange staring looks into space!

PORK

watrsflo

Take a look at a 1st Circuit decision, entitled "Bailey v. Georgia-Pacific" (circa 2002), which concluded that though the complainant was an alcoholic, he not "disabled" under the ADA.

(The 1st Circuit Court of Appeals' jurisdiction includes Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Puerto Rico and Rhode Island).

Don D

>Is my HR Dir too nervous or am I not nervous enough?


Notwithstanding Larry's irrelevant personal shot from the hip, your HR Director has not a clue. I think you should be about the business of applying for his/her job. The notion that the person may be ADA protected, having not come forward and asked for help, is "Alcohol/drug policy 101." You're in for a long haul with your HR Director. Brace yourself.

LarryC

Irrelevant? Yes. Personal? Yes. Misguided? Yes. Poorly timed? Yes. Insulting? Maybe. I guess I'm just not "sensitive" enough. Oh, John Kerry, please help me see the error of my ways. But, shot from the hip? No.

Kiwi

[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 08-13-04 AT 10:18AM (CST)[/font][br][br]I was amused by LarryC's comment, not insulted in the least. My HR Dir doesn't know about the Forum so he can't be insulted by the comment. If anyone else out there in Forumland got a smile from it, that's perfectly fine by me.

Don, the good part with HR Dir is that he defers researching those questions to me. All I have to do is cover my 'are you nuts?' face with my poker face and say I'll check it out and get back to you. I have dutifully done that. Without calling a labor attorney, which is what he would have done. 8-|

edit: I mixed up LarryC and marc's comments. #-o What made me smile was the one about how to accommodate a practicing alcoholic, particularly in the context of a driving position.

JM in ATL

Hi Kiwi -

Just a quick question... the day that the ee was fired, was that the same day he was caught drininking? And if so, who let him drive home legally intoxicated? I know it doesn't relate to the term or not to term question posed, but please tell me that his mngr didn't let him drive drunk after firing him for being drunk.

Kiwi

JM, he smelled of alcohol in the morning, was taken for the screen in under an hour. Unfortunately, the person who initially smelled alcohol did not stop the ee from leaving to make his calls. (Remedial training coming on that issue.) She did, however, immediately alert the ee's mgr who retrieved ee at 1st call of the day and went straight to the clinic. No, ee was not allowed to drive home, his mgr took him.

watrsflo

>Hi Kiwi -
>
>please tell me that his mngr didn't let him drive drunk after firing him for being drunk.

JMinATL--Not to worry, Kiwi stated: >He has been fired. As he was being driven home...,

sonny

I don't know about Don, but the comment with which I took issue was Larry's comment that alcoholism is not a disease.

Don D

That's exactly what I was talking about.

Crout

Everyone's entitled to an opinion, even if it's wrong and uttering it is really insensitive. And Larry, if your mother obviously couldn't teach you manners how do you expect Senator Kerry to?

LarryC

Oh, I know, Crout. It's not a popular opinion and I didn't expect it to be. Seriously though, my mother would be very insulted to find her name in the same sentence with Senator Kerry. But rest easy, my friend. I won't tell her.