Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Work

Chat with other users about all things related to working life on our Work forum.

Original poster

Shocked - need advice. DH summoned to disciplinary for being 'under the influence'.

104 replies

GoatyMcGoatface · 24/03/2018 13:54

Help! DH has just received a letter in the post summoning him to a disciplinary meeting for appearing to be under the influence of alcohol at work (based on his mannerisms observed by someone on the day).

I was working away on the day in question so I can't confirm whether there is any grounds for this as I barely saw DH. DH obviously says he was not under the influence and hadn't had any alcohol at all. He has quite a long drive to work so wouldn't want to risk driving while impaired.

He isn't in a union. He works with a couple of people and believes one of them might have a grudge against him following a disagreement some months ago. He's worked there just over two years.

The letter threatens summary dismissal.

What do we do - how can he refute this? It would seem to be one person's word against his. I'm concerned they might be looking for an excuse to get rid of him due to the disharmony between him and the other man, and the fact he's taken (what I would consider) a relatively high number of sick days (there has however been no management of his absence at all).

I can't really think straight at the moment. Can anyone help?

I have NC for this for obvious reasons.

OP posts:
TeisanLap · 24/03/2018 13:59

How can they prove he was drunk?

It all sounds ridiculous.

Original poster
GoatyMcGoatface · 24/03/2018 14:00

I don't know how they would prove anything. Nothing was said to him at the time, but I suppose if they really did think he was drunk they might have wanted to avoid a confrontation.

OP posts:
BoobleMcB · 24/03/2018 14:01

They can't go straight to a disciplinary hearing in my experience. However given the allegation, the HAVE to start disciplinary proceedings to determine what (if any) charges can/should be brought.

They have to at least have done a full and proper investigation first. This involves him having a meeting where he gives his side of the story and answers any questions put to him. Has he not been asked for a written statement? Has the allegation been raised to him in any way before this? How long ago was the incident in question and has he been working since then?

SleepFreeZone · 24/03/2018 14:02

I agree. How on earth can they prove f he was drunk or not?

Blueraccoon · 24/03/2018 14:02

All sounds a bit odd. Are you sure it isn’t a prank?

Surely they would have spoken to him at the time, not just let him carry on with his day.

SleepFreeZone · 24/03/2018 14:03

Is he a drinker though OP? I’m trying to think whether he might have had a lot to drink the night before so went into work smelling of stale alcohol or something?

Overthinker1 · 24/03/2018 14:03

Has he had the investigation? It could just be the fact finding meeting before a disciplinary which is pretty routine. I had a complaint a staff member was intoxicated about 2 years ago and it was standard procedure to investigate it but it never went to disciplinary as there was no proof/case to answer for. He just needs to attend, listen to what they say, don’t get argumentative but calmly state everything he has to say. If they choose to discipline and he gets a warning or dismissal then appeal it but with no evidence/word against word it would be very hard to make a decision stick

Lovesagin · 24/03/2018 14:09

Actual proof isn't required they only need a 'reasonable belief' that he was under the influence and this could be a number of people observing his behaviour or smell of alcohol for example. He should be given the opportunity to refute the claim and put his case forward. Is there anything in the letter regarding investigation and information gathering? He should be provided with relevant evidence that brought the meeting about such as witness statements and so on beforehand.

Original poster
GoatyMcGoatface · 24/03/2018 14:10

I'm pretty sure it isn't a prank - it's come from his line manager, signed with his usual signature. He hasn't been asked to provide a statement, just to attend the meeting - he's been told he can take a union rep, but he's not in a union. He says he's never been accused of this before and there's no reference to previous allegations.

He's been consistently working there for two years, but since the start of the year has taken three separate sick days - he had a couple of bouts of that flu that was going round - and there were two days during the snow that he wasn't able to drive in - he tried but had to turn back. They were annoyed about those occasions, but he hasn't had any kind of absence management procedure imposed.

OP posts:
Original poster
GoatyMcGoatface · 24/03/2018 14:11

SleepfreeZone He is a drinker, but wasn't drinking the night before. They haven't said he smelled of alcohol.

OP posts:
Original poster
GoatyMcGoatface · 24/03/2018 14:14

The letter states the date and says he was slurring his words and using mannerisms consistent with being under the influence of alcohol.

OP posts:
Blueraccoon · 24/03/2018 14:17

And they let him drive home after observing that!?

Original poster
GoatyMcGoatface · 24/03/2018 14:18

The alleged incident was a couple of weeks ago and he has been working as normal since then - the letter today is the first he has heard of it.

(Apologies for replying rather incoherently, I'm shaken by this).

OP posts:
Original poster
GoatyMcGoatface · 24/03/2018 14:20

Blueraccoon Well, quite! If they thought he was drunk that was a shocking thing to do - it's a good 40 minute drive, not just down the road (not that it would be acceptable to drive any distance if drunk).

OP posts:
Cornishclio · 24/03/2018 14:20

Can he check with HR what the disciplinary process is? I do not know how they can prove this unless it was not the first occasion. I would get him to write a statement of the day in question recalling as much as possible he did that day. He can then present that at the meeting but it seems a bit odd to call a disciplinary meeting without any prior warnings or investigations.

AndromedaPerseus · 24/03/2018 14:21

I'd consult an employment lawyer if you can afford it or the citizens advice bureau at the very least. It all sounds very fishy how it's gone to disciplinary without an investigation it's like being sentenced for a crime without a trial.

Cornishclio · 24/03/2018 14:23

Just out of interest when you say he is a drinker what would you mean by this? Do you mean the odd beer or glass of wine or does he binge drink regularly? A colleague of mine was leant on to take early retirement due to her constantly turning up drunk to work and drinking while in the office. There was no dispute about it though as she admitted she was an alcoholic and in fact had lost her licence and had to spend a night in prison due to a DUI charge.

Lovesagin · 24/03/2018 14:23

Ok so he's had one day sick for a virus type thing, that's absolutely fine unless they use a rolling 12 month period for eg. for monitoring sickness and he's had way more than that since Feb last year. The snow days - they would have been unpaid authorised absences so shouldn't count towards his sick record. Regardless, If they haven't cited his absence record as part of the reason for the disciplinary they cannot use this as part of their investigation unless something discovered during it links back to the reason for the absences given being untrue.

If it is a formal disciplinary and they have skipped the investigation stage (risky) he has the right to be accompanied and it doesn't have to have a TU rep it can be a work colleague.

When is it? I'd be surprised if they genuinely believe this as he should really be suspended pending investigation if it's due to being under the influence at work.

Drum71 · 24/03/2018 14:25

I don’t know how they could prove it. If they thought that on the day then they should have challenged him, not allowed him to continue working and the pin drive home.

Original poster
GoatyMcGoatface · 24/03/2018 14:25

Andromeda - That's a really good idea. I have access to a legal helpline through my own union, which includes assistance for spouses, so I will phone them and see what they say. I should have thought of that - just not thinking straight at all.

OP posts:
clarrylove · 24/03/2018 14:26

Surely they would have done something immediately if they thought he was drunk? What kind of work does he do? Does he operate machinery or interact with the public?

TERFragetteCity · 24/03/2018 14:27

he's been told he can take a union rep, but he's not in a union

He can bring a union rep OR a colleague. By law.

Original poster
GoatyMcGoatface · 24/03/2018 14:29

The meeting is next week. The colleague he doesn't get on with is the only one he regularly works with - there are two others who go from site to site - so there isn't really anyone who can accompany him.

Cornishclio He's a fairly regular weekend/holiday drinker rather than a binge drinker.

OP posts:
Howimetyourdaddy · 24/03/2018 14:30

Get him to call Acas.

He should have the right to be accompanied by a work colleague.

Has he been there over 2 years? I only ask because if he's not then they can 'take a risk' in dismissing as he won't be able to claim for unfair dismissal.

Original poster
GoatyMcGoatface · 24/03/2018 14:32

Clarry There's no public interaction/machine operation. Obviously don't want to say what the exact job is, but it isn't one that it would be risky to do UTI - you'd be incompetent rather than dangerous; however the commute would obviously be very dangerous.

OP posts:
Swipe left for the next trending thread