Over-indulging in alcohol can have flow-on effects for many employers. In the hospitality industry, for example, it can mean patrons who are too many sheets to the wind, and consequently voluble, amorous, maudlin, pugnacious or sick. For police and paramedics, it can mean mangled cars being cut away from mangled bodies. For hospital workers, it can mean peak workloads from accidents and domestic strife, and possibly aggressive or violent patients.
Even for employers whose staff are not at risk from – and do not pose risks to – members of the public, there can be consequences in terms of employees who take sickies the day after, or come to work hungover, or make more mistakes than usual.
Research has shown that people are likely to make more errors even 14 hours after a session of heavy drinking – though their blood alcohol has returned to normal, their judgement and fitness for work have not yet recovered. Even for white-collar workers, their ability to make good decisions can be compromised.
The after-effects of excessive alcohol or drug use can undermine efficiency and effectiveness in almost any occupation, but it’s a particularly acute issue for employers of people in safety-critical jobs, such as air traffic controllers, airline pilots or train drivers who might cause major accidents if they’re affected by overindulgence the day before.
The question for employers is: since we can’t tell people what to do on their days off, what are we supposed to do about it?
How employers can manage risks from holiday binging
The first step is to consider, in consultation with staff, the types of holiday binge-related problems that might potentially affect your business. Once you’re clear on the nature of the possible risks, you need to do what you reasonably can to prevent adverse consequences and have procedures for detecting and responding to instances of impaired work performance.
While an initial reaction might be to opt for drug and alcohol testing, this is not necessarily the most productive course of action, according to Allan Trifonoff, deputy director of the National Centre for Education and Training on Addiction (NCETA), at Flinders University.
Mr Trifonoff notes that testing does not detect impairment: it may detect traces of earlier drug use that is no longer affecting performance, or it may detect zero blood alcohol, though a person is hungover and not properly fit for work.
‘We don’t say “Don’t do drug and alcohol testing”, but testing on its own doesn’t really achieve a lot in terms of changing behaviour or addressing the issue,’ he said.
NCETA’s recommended approach is to establish a policy stating the organisation’s commitment to a working environment in which employees must be fit for work, and their work performance and safety behaviour must not be impaired by overuse of alcohol or other drugs. The policy must be sufficiently explicit about prohibitions, disciplinary consequences, and routine practices, including any planned testing. The policy must also be effectively communicated to all workers, and it must be applied consistently and comprehensively.
Training and information should aim to encourage responsible workplace attitudes, including drawing management’s attention to any incidents or situations likely to put workers’ or others’ health or safety at risk. Training should also cover strategies for dealing with alcohol problems, procedures if the policy is breached, where to go for assistance, legal rights and requirements, confidentiality and privacy rights, and counselling, treatment and rehabilitation services are available.
Training for supervisors
Mr Trifonoff said it was especially important to give supervisors and managers training in how to approach a worker in a respectful way that shows concern rather than blame if a problem is suspected.
He said it tends to be much more productive if the supervisor says things like ‘Are you OK? We’re worried. Is this a one-off, or is there a pattern emerging here? Do you need to see someone on a professional basis?’ and refers the person to sources of assistance such as the EAPS program, rather than saying ‘Oh, so you’ve come to work pissed again’.
The overall culture of a workplace can play a central role in determining the attitudes and behaviour of workers, and the degree to which colleagues will look the other way if a worker’s job performance is thought to be affected by alcohol.
With regular discussion, toolbox talks, and suitable training and reminders, employers can foster a workplace culture that recognises in a non-judgmental way the many factors that can contribute to the misuse of drugs or alcohol, the risks and responsibilities of employers and employees for the safety and welfare of both staff and the business, and puts a high value on coming to work in a state where everyone is able to work in a fit and proper manner.
