Employer introducing a random drug and alcohol test

74jax

I can't remember working for a company where we didn't have this testing.

It was ultra random mostly when I was in construction and I think I was only tested around 5 times in maybe 15yrs.in the fire service I was never selected. 

TELLIT01

Alcohol test can be done by breath test, drugs by mouth swabs.  No need to take the p**s for either.  If the same parameters were used as for drink/drug driving I don't see any reason for objection.  If drink or drugs at a certain level will impair ability to drive it's not unreasonable to assert it can affect the ability of somebody to work within a care environment dealing with people.

MattMattMattUK

Deleted_User said:

The company that I work for has just sent an email to all its employees saying that it's introducing a random drug and/or alcohol testing. There is nothing in my contract saying that this was going to be introduced. All the people in my team are against it, not because we are all taking drugs or are alcoholics (lol) but we feel it's an invasion of privacy and more. It's a stressful job and sometimes in the week I fancy a few drinks to relax and unwind. Can the company force us to take the random test if it comes into force or have we the right to refuse. The email states that if we refuse then disciplinary action will be taken.

Most of the time this is implemented on a health and safety basis and your contract will almost certainly contain provisions that state you must not be intoxicated at work. You having a few drinks to unwind is fine, you having a few drinks on the job is where an issue would occur. 

As they say, you have a right to refuse, they have a right to launch disciplinary action. If you want to push that all the way to having your employment terminated then you can, you can then go to an employment tribunal if you wish. I would imagine you would lose the tribunal, it would also not reflect well on your prospects for future employment. 

Jillanddy

Deleted_User said:

oh_really said:

The workforce need unionised.
What do you mean by the company comes up with new legislation?

It comes up with all sorts of ways to support service users and 'improve' the workplace....of which most are introduced by HR and top top managers that haven't a clue on how certain workplaces actually work or what makes some service users tick. It's a complex job (those of you in the know with experience) but made even more difficult sometimes by the top brass.

That might well be the case. There is an amount of that in any workplace. But, equally, there are a lot of "ordinary workers" who don't know or understand the needs of service users, don't know about or understand the legislative or protective issues that managers must deal with on a day to day basis, and what makes service users "tick" is not necessarily of any relevance to what must be done to ensure compliance with many other factors. You just have a job to do with the clients. It may be complex and important. So do your managers, and theirs is equally complex and important. As you will discover if you ever become a manager.

But your approach to this is all wrong. You must, surely, think that the rights of your service users to not be cared for by people under the influence of drugs or alcohol trumps your right to consume drugs or alcohol to the extent that it may adversely impact on the quality of service that they receive. Isn't the better approach not to refuse - which won't get you anywhere - but to look at what the proposed tests are, how they will be implemented and what the triggers would be, and how the employer might look to support someone who might have a drug or alcohol problem. I seriously doubt that your employers are worried about a person who has a pint of a night to unwind, or a couple of glasses of wine with their evening meal. But they do have cause to be concerned about someone who is downing ten pints, driving to work and then working with vulnerable people, because no matter how well they may be able to cover up the night befores activities on the surface, their judgement is and must be impaired. And if you have never met anyone who can do that, you can't have got around much, because I have seen people manage to cover over serious drinking problems, for it to only become apparent when something has gone seriously wrong.

Manxman_in_exile

oh_really said:

I cant believe folks aren't throwing a hissy fit that there is no regulatory framework for care staff similar to other staff professions, that there is no minimum qualification requirement, that there is no requirement for individuals to be registered with the CQC and on and on and on.

Of course there isn't such a framework and there are no minimum qualifications.  We live in a society that generally prefers not to pay care workers a decent wage so we obviously don't care at all - either about the workers or the people they look after.

(Not disagreeing with you by the way - nor am I knocking care staff, but it's true, we literally don't care... )

Dakta

Having seen the sort of price that care can cost, and a sister who used to work in the field and an idea of the wages they can come out with, makes you wonder where it all goes.

I am not suggesting foul play, in fact a lot of the companies themselves seem to be fledgling, but it does make you wonder where it goes and whether theres something to be fixed somewhere. 

Dakta

TBH when i used to be at the office I used to have the odd lunch at the pub with team members, leaders and managers - sometimes extended. Can't remember our D+A policy but I'd be surprised if they couldn't test us if they wanted to.

I'm a principled person but I don't feel strongly on this, if they've a fair reason to ask, and I've not done anything wrong, might just keep everyone moving to just go with it.

Brie

I think the key will be asking for more details. 

Who is doing the testing and how?  presumably it's someone qualified (medic) not just some manager pretending to know what they are doing.  How invasive are the tests?  (needle or swab) How personal??  I would not want to be observed by a colleague while I hustle up a sample of any sort.  And if observation is required can you choose who is observing??  Many women won't want a male (including trans) doing any observation or even any close contact.  Some may have religious issues that will limit what is possible.  What if there are legitimate drugs that will show as a banned substance?   And re zero tolerance - what about some cold medicines???