Colleague drunk at work

[Icanflyhigh]

Hi all

I know IANBU with this, but more for traffic as its late.

DP received message from his work mate late last night, asking if he was OK to drive this morning (He has form for this and it usually pre-empts him having a few drinks) DP didn't read message (whatsapp) and didn't respond. Fast forward to this morning, colleague arrives at 6am to collect DP to head off to site. DP gave him the benefit of the doubt as he couldn't immediately smell alcohol etc. About half hour into their journey DP realised colleague was definitely still drunk, and had masked the alcohol fumes with coffee, so at first opportunity text the boss to say he was still pissed etc, and he wouldn't allow him on site.

Backstory to this is that DP has told his bosses on at least 2 previous occasions about the same thing and colleague being unable to drive/work on site etc and they have said they need to catch him in the act so to speak - the problem being that they work all over the country on site and the likelihood of someone from head office being able to drop everything and go and breathalyse this dick is very slim.

DP Has now refused to work with this man, he has brought the van home, told bosses he will carry the workload alone (no problem with this) but he absolutely refuses to put his life in the hands of someone who is happy to drink drive and work with machinery on site while pissed.

DPs work have said it's tough shit, and if he doesn't like it, he can leave. So as it is at the moment, DP is sat simultaneously writing his resignation, while also drafting a letter to a solicitor for a constructive dismissal case.
Are there any legal points he can refer to from HSE etc?
I am so angry at the moment I can barely speak.

Sorry that was longer than I thought. There's loads more but I don't want to overload, nor dripfeed.

Sadly, as things stand, the colleague being drunk is just an opinion not a fact, as he wasn’t tested. A lawyer could make it seem that your DP had malicious intent towards the colleague in making reports about him. I am not sure a legal battle, if your DP is fired, would be easy ( though the employer must follow a disciplinary process) . Whilst your DP is right to raise this issue, it could back fire spectacularly.

Your husband was completely wrong to not have phoned the Police the minute he realised his colleague was still drunk. He didn't have to be driving at the time because your husband knew he had driven from his house to yours. Police would have come out and breath tested the colleague there and then and got a statement from your husband to confirm the colleague had driven between houses earlier that morning.

You should STILL be phoning the Police now (on 101) to report it. They'll take his full name, home address, vehicle registration and put on an intelligence report that male regularly drives whilst drunk. If the car is PNC'd when out and about, they can breath test the male on the next occasion.

Statutory Sick Pay is definitely paid by the employer, not the government. No idea how they're getting round not paying full-time employees.

He definitely doesn't have a slam-dunk case for unfair dismissal. He should report his suspicions but refusing to go into work and holding the work van hostage aren't going to fly.

This is getting worse by the minute. (shock)

police would have come out and breath tested him there and then

lol

@Hont1986
Well, they would have in my force!

I think people are missing the point a bit here. It's not necessarily about whether there is proof the colleague was drunk, it's about the employer not taking OP's DH's concerns seriously enough to even investigate. This is clearly a breach of their responsibilities as an employer in this industry. If they are willing to sweep the issue under the carpet and make DH's position there untenable then that's something definitely worth getting legal advice about.

Wrt ssp you have to be off sick for 4 consecutive days before you can claim it, which may be what is happening here?

Also Doremimimi, I would definitely be angry on my husband's behalf and probably get involved if he was having a similar issue - it's called supporting your partner. Clearly in this case OP's involvement has hopefully helped to stop her dh doing anything rash like resigning on the spot.

What your dh should have done is the minute he got to site, found the Health and Safety officer and reported to them that he believed colleague was drunk. They would have red carded colleague. Zero tolerance on building sites for drink and alcohol. Once he was red carded he should have been banned from that site and any others run by that contractor.

The contractor doesn't need proof or a breathalyser, reasonable grounds such as smelling of alcohol, looking drunk, even looking tired are enough.

I am surprised your husband didn't do this. And am surprised that it wasn't pulled that colleague was sleeping it off for 2 days. And am surprised that given the amount of concern your dh has had he didn't just let him walk on site and be kicked off, which any building site would do. Unless they give zero fucks in which case I wouldn't want to work on those sites anyway because the H and S will be shocking and your dh has more to worry about than a drunk colleague.

Something doesn't add up OP. We run our own construction company. Dh has been i the trade for 30 years on various sized sites up and down the country. Never seen anyone openly pissed at work. Seen a fair few kicked off regardless for failing randon drug and alcohol tests. But a colleague so pissed he has to sleep it off for 2 days would not go unnoticed.

SSP is STATUTORY. It's not paid for by the company. It's paid by the government. The only way you would not be entitled to it is if you're self employed.

No, it's paid by the employer. I work in payroll for a construction related industry company.

Is your dh registered for CIS? If not then I can't see how the employer can get away with not paying at least SSP (though that doesn't kick in until after 4 days and is a tiny amount anyway.) Do they offer a pension? It sounds very dodgy full stop and HMRC are cracking down on the construction industry because of this.

@Frouby I'm guessing the company are contractors, probably working on site as the sole workers - maintenance in shops or other businesses for example.

I would go down to the local police station, or get DP to go ideally. Explain the situation, and see what they say. They may be able to come and breathalyse him when it happens again. My local police officer gave me their direct number to contact them, after one incident. Don't let him walk unless he's got another job to go to though!

@SweetNorthernRose thank you, yes that is the only reason I have got involved.

@Frouby it is not a construction site. DP works in flood mitigation and is sent to sites all over the uk from Carlisle to Gloucester and anything in between. The site in question yesterday was a residential house in Scunthorpe - I actually don't care how outing this is now.

When they are on site, there is DP who is in charge as he is the one who holds the tickets and site supervisor certificates. The colleague is his labourer.

The first thing he did when they got to site yesterday was phone back to the office and tell them he wasn't allowing colleague on site as he was too drunk to work. Colleague then slept in the van from 8am til approx 2.30pm/3pm - they left site to return home around 3.45pm. The MD and the office staff had ample opportunity to travel to the site to witness this and breathalyse, but they didn't. The same thing happened in October at a site much closer to the office headquarters. Again DP banned his colleague from site, phoned the office and asked for someone to make a site visit, and why he was requesting such, and was met with the reply "we're too busy, leave it with me".

DP has found that conversation in his messages this morning and screenshot it back to the MD.

Also, yesterday a member of the office staff messaged DP around 3pm and he gave them an update to say colleague had just surfaced from the van and was now on site. The office wanted to tackle it there and then and DP requested they didn't ring the colleague until after the working day was over as he was unsure how colleague would react given he would know it was DP that had reported him.

@Comefromaway SSP is an entirely different issue here and just another example of how the company are a bit shoddy. I think they do offer a pension scheme; but I'm not certain, DP has private pension. Also, he has never had more than 2 or 3 consecutive days off so SSP wouldn't have kicked in anyway. They do pay annual leave entitlement. I think DP is registered for CIS but i can't be certain.

If he's the supervisor, he should know whether there is a drugs and alcohol policy

It could be there isn't one, which is why they are so out of their depth on this.

Another one a bit shocked that they haven’t dealt with this better. Most operationally-focused companies now have Zero tolerance D&A policies and also are hot in health and safety, giving anyone the authority to Stop Work if they’re uncomfortable with anything.

Even when I’m in the office all day away from any worksite, we’re still not allowed to even have half a shandy at lunch; it’s that ingrained in our culture.

@CornishPorsche you are right about how the company works. I couldn't figure out how to explain it properly!
DP has asked for a copy of D&A Policy and nothing has been forthcoming, he has also asked for a copy of his contract and has been told that he doesn't have one. DP knows he does as he signed it when they first employed him.
The attitude of the workplace is that DP cannot dictate who he does and doesn't work with and as there is no one else in this locality to team up with him, he's got to put up with it.
DP knows he cannot dictate who he works with, but he is sure that he has a right to be safe and protected at work.

Interestingly, if DP leaves, they will have no option but to make the colleague redundant as he is not qualified to do the job on his own as he doesn't have the relevant site tickets.

DP has made a submission to HSE and was given three options with the submission, either don't tell the company there has been a submission, tell them but say it was anonymous, or tell them AND give his name. DP has gone with option 3 and said he may as well go big or go home at this point.

He is also now speaking to ACAS about the same issue and will hopefully have some definitive advice by lunchtime.

So the outcome of your friend being pissed is that your DP has lost his job? Surely that's not what you want?

Just tell the boss then stay there until he finds a better one. He has absolutely no proof the guy was pissed so this will not stand up at a tribunal. It is good that he has let the boss know (in writing?)

He really shouldn't stay off work himself. That's unauthorised absence and the employers could very easily give that as the reason why they sack him.

I really can't stress enough how difficult, time consuming and potentially expensive it is to win a constructive or unfair dismissal case. By all means he can and arguably definitely should be looking out for a new job right now with urgency, but it really would be very foolish to rely on the thinking that that can't sack him and if they do he could just win a dismissal case. He should be approaching it with an eye on the fact that the company don't take the law seriously, and that the law/government isn't going to help him if he does lose his job as a baseline. If he is sacked he can't even claim JSA/equivalent UC. That's not right morally but I've seen it happen too many times not to try to strongly advise you and him against it.

Protect himself from:

1. physical danger from drunk colleague
2. legal liability for drunk colleague's cock ups (also the same as protecting colleagues and joe public from him)
3. losing his income, no matter if it's done illegally or back handedly.

@Trewser DP hasn't lost his job (yet) - the good advice from here last stopped him from storming in this morning and slapping his resignation on the desk.

The last thing we want/need is for DP to be unemployed, BUT if it comes to that, we will manage. DP has been told he has a good case for unfair dismissal now if they choose to boot him on the back of him speaking to HSE and ACAS.

You're right, he doesn't have any proof the colleague was pissed, it is purely going to be his word against colleagues. But yes, he has now let the MD know, in writing, what is happening, and as he never deletes anything from his phone, he has a mixture of whatsapp, messenger and text messages which support what he is saying - though how reliable they would be as evidence, I don't know.

DPs biggest issue, the same as mine, is that this colleague knowingly on at least 2 occasions has driven a huge transit type van through a small rural village, whilst over the limit through alcohol.
The argument that at 6am it is so quiet is invalid and is offset by the argument that at 7.30am it is not, and there are hoards of school children waiting for buses, including mine and DPs eldest DD.

Yes, with hindsight, we would have reported to 101 on Wednesday night as soon as DP received the initial message about driving first thing, as we knew what the connotations of that message were.
Had we have done this, we could have given exact timings, travel direction between two addresses and hopefully a police officer would have been able to be somewhere along that half mile route. This would most definitely have forced the hand of the employer as he would have been arrested and charged with drink driving; and as it would have been a works vehicle they would have had recourse for instant dismissal based on gross misconduct. Hindsight is a wonderful thing.

We have heard this morning that the colleague is to be called in to the office for a meeting today - best outcome there is that he admits he slept all day yesterday in the van as he was drunk when he got to work, I think that will give them all they need to get rid of him, as in admitting that, he will also be admitting that he drove a works vehicle while over the limit.
He will also know at the point that DP reported him. If they are forced to continue to work together, this will make for a very unpleasant atmosphere between them, and yes, I have already accepted that our friendship will no longer continue, which is sad to some extent, but I cannot condone drink driving in any way.

I agree his drink driving is awful but you now need to leave it up to the employer.

If you knowingly hand over keys to a drunk person, you are committing an offence. I know your between a rock and a hard place, but DP is sitting on both sides of the fence, he was right to take the keys off him driving to work yesterday, but if unfit to carry out the work he should have been stood down, and failure to observe that should mean police are called. All the letter will and any text will show, is that you had doubts about his driving ability and beleived he was drunk. "Still no proof" The way this is going DPs colleague will be promoted and DP out on his ear.

This charity also offers specific advice to whistleblowers. They are excellent

protect-advice.org.uk/

Any properly run construction site will have mandatory random D&A testing. The on site manager should be able to test anyone they believe they have reason to before they start work.

Alcoholism is absolutely rife in the construction industry.

@Notodontidae DP hasn't knowingly handed any keys over to a drunk person. He took the keys off him as he needed them to drive the van.

How on earth do you figure that colleague will get a promotion out of this?

@jewel1968 thank you, we looked at the site this morning and yes very helpful.

@OutFoxxedByABadger thank you. DP is now taking steps to search for alternative employment as a matter of urgency.

@inwood DP IS the onsite manager when they are out on site. There is literally the two of them and DP is the one in charge.

DP has asked for a copy of D&A policy - nothing has been forthcoming.

So colleague wasn't drunk this morning when he collected keys?

Phew for that at least.

This is one time when I think it's fair enough to not do anything anonymously. You don't fucking drive drunk, nor do you turn up to ANY kind of work drunk, for any reason. He's even had near misses when it comes to his colleague telling him it's not okay and refusing to allow him on site. The fact that he's still knowingly doing it just a week or two after that is full on insane. The most charitable thing I can say is that he must be addicted, but that doesn't excuse one of the most basic rules of society - you don't drink and drive. Period. So thre fact that he will know it is your H who shopped him, so what. He's the one doing the utterly unacceptable thing, he's the one very obviously in the wrong, and he's not even denying it.