GREAT POST ON DRUG AND ALCOHOL POLICIES - SAVED FROM THE PAST

This is an old forum post taken from November 2007 combining two topics that have similar arguments, Smoking Pot and a drinking debate.

ORIGINAL TOPIC - Smoking Pot

PATTY CAKES- Daughter failed a drug test and got fired. I'm trying to wrap my mind around this. There is no reason for her to lose her job, absolutely none. She is not smoking at work, she is a smart individual what she does on off time is hers. WHAT'S YOUR OPINION?

LEFTY- If she failed the drug test she was not doing it on her own time. She knows the cost. Now she pays the price. I have a drug free workplace. Fired 2 guys last week. Failed the random test. One was my nephew.

ROOFBOY- Lefty wrote "If she failed the drug test she was not doing it on her own time". Pot can stay in your system from as little as 3 days to as long as 90 days. I feel what people do on their own time should not condemn them as long as it does not effect their ability to function on the job. People can drink until 2 in the morning and be at work by 6 or 7 and people don't have a problem with that. What is so different about pot, oh yeah its illegal. Well legalize it and regulate it like it is alcohol. Just my .02.

LEFTY- If you test positive for alcohol you would lose your job too. It is a safer and happier place to work without drunks or druggies around. It affects the whole job place. Drug policies are very clear. Under my drug policy, you have up till you have to go to ask for help. You have an accident. You are told to go because of our random tests. You are displaying the actions of someone under the influence. Then asked to go for a test. And of these three happen. You lose your job. If you come before any of these happen. Treatment is available for you. I have health insurance for my guys. So rehab and ongoing counseling is available to them. The help is still there through your insurance, just not your job.

ROOFDOG- You mean to tell me if a guy's drinks a 12 pack over the weekend and tests positive for alcohol you fire them? Not everybody who drinks is an alcoholic.

RRD- Not speaking for Lefty by any means, but if one has alcohol in ones blood that person is still "under the influence" of alcohol to some degree till its gone. It the pot link someone provided Saturday is to be believed: What is frequently described as THC's lingering in the body fluids and organs are metabolites of Delta-9-THC, the inert substances that the body disposes of in the urine and excrement, in much the same way as it disposes with Vitamin A. It is these that are detected in the body organs and urine, long after the effects of Delta-9-THC have worn off. This would seem to imply that one could register a positive test on pot but not actually be under the influence.

Jessie- Roofdog, My dad is the owner of the company and the way I understand out Drug and Alcohol policy as an employee is this. Yes if I test positive for alcohol. I can be fired.

LEFTY- This is not if you are an alcoholic or a drug addict. This is about if you have drugs or alcohol in your system. The word alcoholic is misused. Alcoholics are a very small portion of society. Around 5%. People who drink are a lot more. Anyone that tests positive is not an alcoholic. Most of you view this testing as a moral issue. This is a safety and attitude issue. If you are positive and you drank once in your life. You lose.

ROOFSRUS- I think that your five-percent figure is hopelessly out of date. The figure would have to be at least ten percent to maybe almost twenty percent of the working population that are alcoholics or substance abusers.

GTP1003- I see Lefty's point. But I think it is a little harsh to PBT(personal breath test) a guy at 8am on Monday. Kinda telling him what and what not he can do with his weekend. Now if he has been over .08 then yes I understand he is legally drunk. But if Monday at 6am he blows .01 I don't think he should lose his or her job. I would think for alcohol there would be some sort of line in the sand, per say. Now drugs, that's a whole new problem I agree with that policy, but for drinking no I do not. If he is not legally drunk Then no reason to fire a person if he has had 6 beers on Sunday. If the PBT does not register anything in the following morning then OK. But then giving such PBT would tell without a doubt is he drunk or not. Peeing in a cup tells nothing about how much you drank. TRUST me on this. I know first hand lets just say, and no I did not lose a job. If you're going to test for drinking do it the most accurate way. PBT or nothing. Then there is that you cannot force me to do this or fire me. I feel you cannot tell a guy to not drink on his day off. Just my 2 cents. If he is sober on Monday morning so what. Peeing in the cup said what he did yesterday not this morning.

LEFTY- GTP1003, You have the choice of working for a company without a drug policy.

CHIPPER- I believe it would talk little effort to find historical data that proves that when employees are injured on the job, they usually hold the owner of the business responsible. The drug policy is just a means to reduce the owners potential liability. It's got everything to do with protecting both the users as well as the non-users.

GTP103- Basically from what I am getting from you is you do not want anyone that ever drinks. That's biased. That is not an EOE company then. Is that what you are saying? Sounds like it to me. Come out and say it please so I can understand and not have to do math to figure out what you are saying. Are you saying that no one under any circumstances can drink any alcoholic beverages at all while in your employ?

ROOFDUDE- It isn't just the owners I'm not sure about everywhere but I know here the state Workers Comp has passed laws to minimize and deny claims when the worker is under the influence. I believe if you are hospitalizes for a work relate injury, one of the procedures is to test you for drugs & alcohol.

LEFTY- Both my sons drink. If they want their jobs, they need to drink responsibly. They decide what that is not me. All they need to do is pass the test. Adam came up on the random two times in a row. He passed.

DARRYL- A drug free work place reduces our workers comp rate, if we do not adhere to the rules and regulations of our insurance company, you get cancelled, if you get cancelled the employee that broke the rule will not have a job anyway. The way that society looks at it is very simple if you know that by breaking the rues set down for employees, and you are willing to break those rules and put everyone at risk, then the employee really doesn't give 2 chits about his or hers job and doesn't deserve it. What other rules or regulations are they willing to break and put others at risk, over the years I have sent many employees to treatment and told them that they could have their jobs back if they followed the rules. I think that maybe the return rate was under 25%. Personally I do not want an employee working for me who is willing to put the company and its employees at risk. I don't understand what the problem is, If you have a problem with D7D it will show up, for years I tried to hide my problem and finally all hell broke loose I haven't had a D&D since 1985 and today I don't worry about taking tests.

THE ROOFING COMPANY- Not that I want to get deep into this discussion, but I will say good for you, lefty for having such a policy in place. It shows your commitment to your company and clients.

JESSIE- This seems to be very simple. When you get hired you know the policy. It is gone over so you understand it. If you choose to break the policy you are fired. It seems clear to me.

DCROOF- Doing commercial work many of the customers we have require a drug testing policy. We would do it anyway. We do not test employees for alcohol though. However, our DOT drivers get a different type of drug test and are in a consortium for random testing for both alcohol and drugs. This is a DOT law.

OLD SCHOOL- What Darryl and Jessie said. If you know and understand the company policy, you drink excessively at your own risk. You wouldn't visit Flo's Whorehouse and then wonder how and why you picked up a good dose of clap would you? I personally don't care what you do on your own time, but don't ask me to bear any of the consequences. The problems we are talking about are all excesses. Excess food can make you obese and that is bad for you. Excess drinking can and will cause problems of all kinds, WORK, talking on the phone or even reading the computer screen. You guys seem to imply that Left doesn't want his employees to drink. What Lefty doesn't want is for them to test + on any test. How they do that is their own business, but if they fail, then at least they know the consequences. Come on guys, be men and own up to your actions and stop blaming the world for your troubles.

This couldn't have came any closer to home than this past week. We had to let go of two foreman and one of our roofers. They coulndn't wait till after work to head to the bar. Didn't like having it thrown in my face and had my handbook to refer to. We have more work than we can shake a stick at since Storm Sandy came through our area. We had 2 employees tell us in not so many words that people were drinking at lunch time. Safety meeting on Monday morning about drug and alcohol abuse. Friday the customer calls asking if we were coming back to the jobsite. President goes out to the jobsite they were back but wouldn't come close enough to talk to. Investigated where they went for lunch, Pizza Hut with a bar next door. They gave a reciept for Pizza Hut showed they were there 1 HR. Went next door and the bar maid described our guys down to the tee. Stated she served everyone of them. They were there over 1.5 hours. Termination of all followed. Zero tolerance on drugs or alcohol during working hours. We simply enforced the rules that were already in place. Had they come up to us and stated they had a problem and wanted help, we would have helped and only suspended them.

Such valuable opinions here

Drug Free was probably the single best, and hardest, business decision I ever made. We were the second roofing contractor in the state to do it. The first one went bankrupt, and he helped me immensely in setting up my program back in the mid 90's. Long before it was the kosher thing to do.

I lost some good guys. Some that said "F-it, I'll do what I want on my time." and walked out the door. Other's that failed and refused rehab.

Many are still here that went through rehab.

Only one has ever come to me and said "I wanted to thank you for saving my life and my family. I used to spend the weekends in a coma, and now I enjoy my life again. If it never helps one other person, I want you to know that I will forever appreciate it."

Made every dollar ever spent, and every hassle endured, worth every bit of it.

Almost 20 years later, when I look at the employees I have now, the employees I had then. The problems I have now, the problems I had then.......... the question left in my head is "Dad, why didn't you do this 20 years before me?" LOL

I had en employee tell me "You'll have to shut the doors", but when I had people using and selling on the roofs of customers, and state law won't let you fire someone for suspicion, and I knew the problem was more rampant than any of us could comprehend, I was scared to death the day of reconning finally came but it had to be done. Only 3 guys walked out the door. A few more left through natural attrition of the program, but I'm telling you, hands-down bar-none no argument about it, I have a much better, reliable, quality focused, company concerned band of brothers today than I ever dreamed possible.

As I've told you to your face every time I see you, Thank You Brian T. for all your help. I still owe you.

That's much much too harsh for the type of operation I maintain, but I have a million different ways and antennae to keep an accurate tab on what is happening. On the other hand, if I wasn't actually there, and had to hire people that I couldn't read, I would have to test. But, then, you know, for a liberal I'm a conservative and for a conservative I'm a liberal. Unless it's you and me and a whole lot of personal responsibility passing back and forth between us, something I consider a prerequisite to any decent relationship, I have a terrible time paying more than lip service to any unbending policy and I feel that my suspicions about policy have been justified by experience on all fronts. Policy is a substitute for vital connection. Yes, you need policy and no, you cannot treat it as though it were infinitely expendable, but it's a very poor proxy for something better. The bigger and more spread out you get, the more policy you need and the stronger it needs to be; that is something I won't argue with.