Drugs and Alcohol in the Workplace
REAL DANGER OR SCAREMONGERING?
Britain is the official Heroin Capital of European drug abuse. It also tops the ‘League’ in terms of Cocaine and Amphetamine abuse, according to European monitoring sources. We are third in the Ecstasy use ‘table’.
Deaths from cirrhosis of the liver have increased by 959% in men and 924% in women over the past 30 years. We are becoming a nation of heavy drinkers. So how does this affect the workplace?
If one considers that all the common drugs of abuse are psychotropic, in that they work on the brain to influence and alter perception, then the consequences of abuse within a working environment, particularly where safety-sensitive or operationally critical jobs are undertaken, become obvious.
Common features experienced by moderate users can include a loss of co-ordination, paranoia, loss of concentration, depression, lack of motivation, anxiety, loss of memory. The heavier the use the more likely the appearance of the worst symptoms, allied to the problems of addiction.
When such symptoms manifest themselves within the working environment it is not surprising that the likelihood of accidents or poor performance is increased and that irritable or paranoid abusers do not endear themselves to fellow workers.
Cannabis is currently ‘in the news’ because of increasing evidence that use of the drug can increase the risk of brain damage, particularly in the younger abusers.
It may be that the reclassification of cannabis sent the wrong message to the country as we spend approximately £1bn per year on the drug.
Of 15,000 accredited scientific papers on the effects of cannabis none give it a clean bill of health. It is used as a ‘red herring’ in the medical use argument, ignoring the numerous inconvenient potential side effects.
The fact that pre-cancerous lesions appear in young cannabis smokers which do not normally appear in tobacco smokers until middle age, and the propensity for cannabis users to contract rare head and neck cancers is also conveniently forgotten.
Babies born to cannabis-smoking mothers are often lighter and more prone to leukaemia.
A survey carried out on behalf of the TUC suggests that 15 million working days are lost per annum because of alcohol abuse. Some 60% of employers believed that they had a problem with alcohol abuse within their working environment, whilst 27% believed they had a drug problem.
As an employer it is chilling to note that 25% of those seeking help for drug problems are in employment and that some 25% of workplace accidents are alcohol related. The effect of drugs on workplace accidents is less well known because of testing sensitivities.
Virtually everyone agrees that companies and organisations should have a coherent policy covering drug and alcohol abuse within the working environment. The problem comes with the need for testing to ensure compliance.
The recent Independent Inquiry into Drug Testing in the Workplace (IIDTW) suggested that business has a legitimate interest in employee drug/alcohol use:
- Where illegal activity is taking place
- Where safety critical work is involved
- Where someone is intoxicated at work, where their use or abuse is impacting ‘beyond a reasonable threshold’
- Where there is a public trust or expectation issue.
Government figures show that people who abuse drugs, as opposed to their non drug taking colleagues are:
- 33% less productive
- 250% more likely to have an absence of 8 days or more
- 300% more likely to require sickness benefit
- 500% more likely to be involved in an off-site, out of work incident which affects their attendance
- 500% more likely to file grievance claims
- 1000% more likely to be absent from work for any period.
Faced with this sort of evidence employers may feel that, where mistakes by key employees could threaten corporate viability, they should also have a concern.
There are many ways of assessing whether there is a potential problem within the workplace, either corporate or individual.
Statistical information deal with sickness, absenteeism, accidents, reduced output etc. Managers, cleaners and supervisors may find the physical evidence of abuse such as discarded bottles or needles, used tinfoil, ‘dealer’ bags, and similar items whilst individuals may display some of the signs of abuse in their deteriorating appearance or performance.
The issue of having a policy, with or without testing procedures, is a sensitive one which requires careful handling, real consultation with all interested parties, and a thorough analysis of potential risk. Employers and managers should not forget that they have responsibilities under a number of pieces of legislation, not the least of which is the Health and Safety at Work Act, 1974. Employers cannot bury their head in the sand and in the worst of circumstances it might be possible to bring Corporate Manslaughter charges against senior managers or Directors.
If testing is to be undertaken then this can be done within five categories:
- Pre employment
- Pre promotion
- Random
- For Cause
- Post Accident.
In-house testing, or outsourcing should be one of the considerations and the need for a medical review of anyone identified as having a drug or alcohol problem should be borne in mind.
If you believe you may have a problem involving the abuse of drugs or alcohol within your workplace it is not something which you can ignore, or if you do so it will be at your peril.
If you believe you do not have such a problem ask yourself one question – “How do I know?”.
For free initial advice on the considerations of implementing a drug and alcohol policy, with or without testing, please contact Paul Johnson, Ovag Limited, on 01924-385382, or write to him at Ovag Limited, International House, Trinity Business Park, Turner Way Wakefield, West Yorkshire, WF2 8EF.
|
