A company is reaching an important milestone in its history and planning an event. Small company of about 50 people.
Event is dinner then entertainment and drinks/ dancing at a hired venue. Ahead of the event, colleagues are told what to expect, that some clients will be there too and to therefore enjoy but behave accordingly etc (it was implied not to get blind drunk but not explicitly said)
Colleague A is relatively new to the business and still in probation but doing good job. They are told about the event like everyone else.
On the night the free booze is flowing like it often is at these kind of events and it becomes apparent colleague A is enjoying the booze a lot but as this is their first time drinking in front of other colleagues, people aren't aware when to step in or that it could lead to big issues (some people can drink loads with no issue, some can't etc) plus everyone else is drinking too, although a bit more moderately.
As night wears on (when some people had already headed home) colleague A reveals themselves as quite a rude and obnoxious drunk, they offend a long standing client, an older colleague then vomit on senior leaders shoes.
Not sure how it played out beyond that but a few days later back at work there's an email that colleague A is no longer in the business.
I've been shocked by the whole thing and wondering who was more at fault? Should colleague A have curbed the drinking on the night or should company not have had so much free alcohol on offer? Its a recipe for disaster if you don't know when to stop drinking but equally moderate drinkers are entitled to some free drinks to enjoy themselves surely?
YABU - the company's free booze is to blame, its a recipe for disaster that they should have seen coming
YANBU - colleague A should have acted accordingly and known when to stop at a work event