Alcohol Policy at Work – Is it important?

In the final part of his series about alcoholism at work, Dr John McMahon asks if it is important to have an alcohol policy at work.  (Ed Scrivener)

Is having an Alcohol policy at work really that important?  After all, everyone knows that drinking at work, or coming to work under the influence, is not a behaviour that is tolerated.  Indeed, isn’t it obvious that this kind of behaviour would be considered gross misconduct and could, and probably would, lead to dismissal.  After all, it is just common sense so why would we need to put it into an explicit alcohol policy.

Certainly, that appears to be the attitude that many employers take.  A recent survey found that less than 20% of employers had a specific alcohol policy, apparently assuming that there was no need to state the obvious.  Are they correct in this assumption?  No they are not, not if they don’t want to fall foul of an industrial tribunal they are not.

For example it would appear that an employment tribunal would uphold a decision to sack for drunkenness, which is exactly what you would expect, is it not.   Indeed, it appears that they will even uphold a decision to fire if an employee comes to work unfit for work, even though they may not actually be inebriated.  Let’s look at an example.

United Biscuits vs Ian Waters

In a recent case, United Biscuits vs Ian Waters, it appears that Waters was fired for arriving at work smelling of alcohol and looking tired and red eyed.  He had attended the funeral of a friend the day before and had been drinking.  His supervisor accepted that he was not intoxicated, but nevertheless judged him unfit for work and banned him from the factory floor.  Waters was later sacked.  The tribunal agreed and upheld his sacking as a reasonable response in this situation.  As evidence, they cited that United Biscuits had a clear policy stating that inability to work because of alcohol would be treated as gross misconduct and could result in dismissal.

There are two important points to be taken from this case.  The first is that the tribunal cited the company’s alcohol policy as the basis for its findings.  If you trawl through tribunal findings it is clear that the outcomes of the cases are very much based on what the employer’s alcohol policy specifies and whether the employer has adhered to the particulars of its own policy.

Tribunals do not make arbitrary judgments based on some notional concept of ‘universal’ or ‘natural law’.  Instead it is based on the policy that the employer creates.   So it would it is important to, not only have a policy but to, have one that is explicit about the particular consequences that can be expected for any breach of the policy.  The second point is a far reaching one that we will return to after this next case.

Are the employees clear about your alcohol policy?

However having the policy is only one part of a company’s responsibilities.  It is also important that the employees are aware of the policy and its contents.  In another tribunal, an employee who drank alcohol during working hours, but not on the company’s premises was judged to have been unfairly dismissed, as he did not know the company’s alcohol.  He stated that he was aware that drinking alcohol on the company’s premises was subject to disciplinary proceedings up to and including dismissal.  However he argued that he was unaware that consuming alcohol when off the premises during working hours was subject to the same penalties.  You might think that this is a flimsy excuse, as of course the employees know what is expected and the consequences.  However the tribunal upheld his case as did the appeal.

Employees can be held accountable for their off duty behaviour

 One important and far reaching aspect of these judgements is that the actual drinking that led to dismissal took place outside the employers premises in both, and also outwith working hours for the second.  In this current culture of Binge Drinking a sizeable minority of your employees will drink to excess and arrive the next day unfit to work as they may be still intoxicated or hungover.  It would appear then that, provided all the proper procedures are followed, a tribunal will support an employer in firing these employees.

This could have far reaching implications.  Employers could become a positive influence on their employees’ drinking behaviour, by ensuring that all workers are fit for work and ensuring that the policy is enforced.  As part of disseminating their policy they could take this opportunity to educate the workforce about alcohol, for example the relationship between quantity consumed and the time required to metabolise the alcohol and be fit for work.  This education process could be written into the official alcohol policy.

Summary

If employers are going to protect themselves, and their workforce, they need to ensure that they create a clear and comprehensive alcohol policy.  The policy should clearly detail what is and is not allowed and the consequences for any digressions from this policy.  The policy also needs to be disseminated to all employees and to be enforced in a consistent and equitable fashion.  Lastly there is an opportunity to include some alcohol-related education (units of alcohol, how long to clear the system etc) when disseminating the policy.  This way employers could save money, have a healthier workforce and, in the unfortunate eventuality of ending up in a tribunal, employers should ensure a positive outcome.

About the author

Dr John McMahon is an alcohol expert who has been involved in the alcohol and drug field for 30 years.  He is currently the CEO of Iloumanate Ltd, a company with a mission to change the binge culture of the UK part of which involves helping employers save money by addressing their workforce’s drinking using a free website www.spreade.com

Previously he was senior lecturer in alcohol and drugs at the Centre for Alcohol and Drug Studies at the University of the West of Scotland for 12 years and Research fellow at the University of Glasgow before that.   He was responsible for setting up and writing the MSc in Alcohol and Drug Studies as a distance learning course. This is now the largest course of its kind in the UK.

He was Research Director for a major alcohol treatment charity, was the National Chair of the Alcohol Counsellor Training scheme.  He has published two books and about fifty papers in scholarly journals, has presented at many national and international conferences and is included in Marquis Who’s Who.

Has this inspired you to discuss HR?  Leave your comments here.

*****

Discuss HR is that HR blog brought to you by the people of Human Resources UK, the HR LinkedIn group with 11,000+ members dedicated to the world of HR.

Any source