Random spot check drug and alcohol tests at work

Reasonably serious discussion
1

So I work at a place where they already have a drug and alcohol policy which pretty much is if your managers is concerned that you are under the influence of a substance can ask you to take a drug and alcohol test. I read a lot of HR policy and that one inititally passed me by.

Today I discovered that they plan to bring in randon spot checks. The detail isn’t clear but it could be for certain types of job (get the feeling as a front line worker that I could be on the list) or randon HR lottery. I would possibly fail the test at times for taking painkillers for a bad back. It’s not often but I could. I wouldn’t fail for illegal drugs but maybe after a weekend at Pap’s for a party I’d fail the alcohol.

I don’t turn up to work under the influence of anything but I find the fact they want to spot check all staff for a minority of people who do, pretty bloody infuriating. There is a policy in place already. Leave it as it is.

  • A - not a bother, I don’t do either of the above so would pass no probs.
  • B - an intrusive unnecessary test that makes me query my employer and cause me stress

0 voters

2

I’m self employed, so i’m my own boss :laughing: I haven’t been to a weekend at Pap’s though :s

1 Like
3

My opinion is that you should never be under the influence when working, nor should you get yourself so fucked outside of work that you are incapable of work when you have to do it.

Outside of that, if an employee does his or her job, an employer has no business in the personal affairs of its people.

4

Originally posted by @pap

My opinion is that you should never be under the influence when working, nor should you get yourself so fucked outside of work that you are incapable of work when you have to do it.

Outside of that, if an employee does his or her job, an employer has no business in the personal affairs of its people.

largely agree with this. Though I’d be lying if I said I’d never showed up for work still, technically, under the influence from the previous night. I’m a trooper, so I carry on and I sit behind a desk so there’s no chance of my fuck ups hurting anyone. Worst comes to worst, some rich folk make slightly less money til I fix my fuck up.

Always found it odd that TFL have random drug tests. I get tests to ensure people aren’t currently pissed, especially drivers, but it’s all staff to check for illicit substances at anytime. Which, imo, is over reaching.

As pap says, as long as it isn’t affecting your performance at work, or you aren’t acting in a way that brings your employer into disrepute, what you do off the clock is your business.

2 Likes
5

I think it depends on the industry as well. I know that the oil and gas industry do this. The rational behind it is more about health and safety etc. Whilst that generally only applies to the drilling crews, the company want to embed the idea into the culture of the organisation as a whole.

Intiniki, if you are taking prescription drugs then you will be fine and if in doubt raise it in advance with HR.

1 Like
6

Sympathise. Quit and go work for my local authority. They don’t even do spot checks to see if workers turn up.

7

Drug problems, marital issues, pictures of your cat - never take any of these things into the workplace.

6 Likes
8

In the interests of fairness I think that you should be kicked out of the pub if you’re caught talking about work.

4 Likes
9

There is already a policy and most people in the work place will be working at desks. Quite a few at home due to “smart working”. Agreed I don’t want tanker drivers, oil rig workers, pilots, surgeons or politicians (Osbourne) to be off their faces whilst at work making important decisions. But for our work force I think it’s all a bit too big brothery.

1 Like
10

What stops them having them everywhere is money, they cost a furtune to do properly, and remember kids its not what you take its what your body/organs secretes and thats what they look for, the by product of consumption. If you are in work and get tested and have a substance that is still “active” then they should throw the book at you but otherwise no, the issue is when is a substance “active” and getting consent would be a nightmare.

Do Doctors get randoms or teachers? I bet they don’t. In fact I know they don’t.

11

we had them at our work and half the workforce immediately went home sick. Half of the ones that stayed, failed. What you gonna do? You can’t sack everyone. We need ppl to drive our 26T HGV vehicles down residential streets RIP.

1 Like
12

Let me tell you a story. Maybe it will pass on some ideas. :cool:

Something I learnt (to my surprise) when I moved down here back in the 1700’s was the impact of Weed related substances. (It is of course illegal to Smoke any derivatives down here)

Back then there was a case of two Air Hostesses who had been passengers in a car that had an accident that resulted in some minor injuries. The driver was tested and found to have consumed a SMALL amount of alcohol - well under the UK limit - (BUT also illegal unless you have a permit - a tale for later in the thread btw) so all the occupants of the car were tested.

The two Hosties were arrested as they failed a Drugs test. Some 3 weeks early they had been on Vacation in Thailand and had consumed some Weed while up and around Chang Mai. Obviously they were not “under the influence” yet the tests showed minimal remnants of Weed in their bloodstream. (Now that was a surprise, none of us knew that “Weed” stays in your system for up to 4 weeks - which made us realise why most Footballers consume Coke)

The SURPRISE for everyone here was that they were found guilty of POSSESSION and received FOUR YEAR sentences. NONE of that is a criticism of the rules here, it was a lesson to EVERYONE on how the law was actually interpreted.

So this meant that anyone who for example had a stop over in Amsterdam and stood next to a “Smoker” etc was then breaking the law when they came “home”

Fast forward and I had a situation where our Employer wanted to implement the standard Random Drugs and Alcohol Tests at work - I won the battle and they were removed from everyone’s Contracts in a hurry.

I caught them using FEAR and “The threat of” the much maligned European Court of Human RIghts no less- NOT because “we all wanted to consume illegal Drugs” but because of the Alcohol & Drug issue in THIS Country

Alcohol is available to purchase at Duty Free on Arrival, and in Licenced Bars in Hotels & Sports Clubs. You just buy it. It is also available from “shops” in other Emirates (read that as Counties) some 45 minutes from Dubai, OR it is available from a “Booze Shop” for which you need a Liquor Permit.

Nobody asks for a permit EXCEPT these shops. BUT should you get caught doing something wrong by the Police and NOT have a permit then you have committed a criminal offence with a 3 month Jail Sentence. (This is something that Tourists get very wrong when they give it large after a few bevvies) But the basic rule is behave and you don’t notice. The Licence costs 30 quid a year but you get vouchers worth 100 quid.

So, back to the Employer. First of all the Employment Contracts were standard and global so the first point of Law that they had missed out was:

"What is the ACTUAL limit?. In the UK this is important as you can be legal to drive but could lose your job? That actually for an Office Bound Emplyee COULD be a cause for legal action. The Company would have to PROVE that 0.00001% of Alcohol in your system - for eg caused by having a Steak in Red Wine Sauce for Lunch caused you to lose your job? BIG PR Risk for the employer that!

Down here there were two issues

  1. The legal Alcohol llimit is ZERO.

  2. Any failed Drug or Acohol Test performed by any Approved Medical Centre MUST be reported to the Authorities. Under UAE Law you fail a test you get arrested and only when you appear in Court can you give your Alcohol Permit as Evidence of Innonence. (Pedantic but logical as in 99% of cases you would have only been there IF you had committed another crime)

So any employee having 0.00001% of Alcohol in their system would be arrested, held in Jail on Remand for up to a week and would have to appear in Court about a year later having had to surrender their passport!

Only then would they HAVE to hold a Liqour Licence OR the Company Test would mean a Jail Sentence. So straight away

“You have to pay for Alcohol Permits for all staff members” would be the obvious call - HR has no budget is the answer. You have to pay Salary while they are in Jail for no reason, oh and THEN you have to pay them Damages for impacting their ability to travel.

THEN the issue came up of “lapsed Muslims” who CANNOT get a licence and suddenly an action by HR could destroy more than a persons employment.

So quick call to a good lawyer (my Daughter) quick check of the much maligned European Court of Human Rights and we found enough vague waffle to scare the BeeJesus out of the HR Department by showing that anyone getting caught in this mess could sue them for damages in the millions of Euros. (YAY! Pension Plan we all cried! :lou_sunglasses:)

Then, we added in the Glastonbury Factor. Namely that anyone who attends something like Glasto will be in the presence of a large number of people who are “consuming Drugs” and that it would not be logical nor feasible for anyone to avoid “Passive Smoking” (God Bless all that UK Research that led to the Ban on Smoking in Pubs!) - so again, the HR rules could jeopardise more than the Employment prospects of an Employee who would have witnesses who could testify that no “Drugs” had been consumer. (UAE Law does not allow that as a Defence btw) yet an Employee could be Jailed for 4 years.

So the short of it is - if it is a new policy a good lawyer can rip it to shreds in a few seconds. For us it took 8 weeks to rip it to shreds and about 1000 pounds of legal fees. They then had to drop the policy world-wide when they reallised that they had too many variables that they had missed in the lazy assed introduction.

In other words - this is a great way to Fvck Globalisation.

(The Author of this book fully understands that Certain Job Functions must have Zero Tolerance - I don’t want my Airplane Pilot under the influence when I fly home!

Yet HR are SOB’s and lazy when it comes to policy and rely on fear and intimidation to get away with murder - source my mate who’s a Glbal VP of HR)

3 Likes
13

I would not let them in my front door!

14

Originally posted by @Dubai_Phil

(The Author of this book fully understands that Certain Job Functions must have Zero Tolerance - I don’t want my Airplane Pilot under the influence when I fly home!

Have you not seen Flight with Denzel Washington?

Originally posted by @Sfcsim

I would not let them in my front door!

Do you random drug test yourself, or not let yourself back cake in the morning if you’re hanging from the night before?

15

Yeah, but tbf, if Denzil hand’t been smashed he’d NEVER have come up with that whacky idea to keep the plane flying!

16

Exactly, therefore every time I get on a plane now I make sure that the co-pilot is born again Christian and that the Pilot is smashed out of his face.

17

I also heard that eating bread with poppy seeds on it could be enough to fail a zero tolerance drug test - not sure how true that is though…

1 Like
18

So, reading this I thought “that has to be one of those urban myths that go round, that can’t be true. surely”

But, a quick google suggests that it may actually be true after all. So much so that some prisons in the states have banned consumption of poppy seeds.

Thanks Mango, learned something new today.

19

If I had a test on a Monday morning I expect they may find some urine in my alcohol.

1 Like