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

[GoatyMcGoatface]

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.

But other than the driving it would be feasible?
Sorry if I sound like I'm winding you up, I'm really not meaning to. But it does sound like he's a problem drinker and may have made a huge error of judgement.
Of course the chance that someone who dislikes him has seen an opportunity is also quite high.

I hope you're wrong too. The thought of him driving under the influence doesn't bear thinking about.

Stealth I honestly wouldn't believe him stupid enough to do that.

Given that he only works in close relation to the colleague he has bad blood with, it's pretty clear where any malicious claim would've come from. Would the disgruntled colleague risk their own job over a false accusation?
I would be beyond shocked if my DP was accused of this, not because I wasn't there on the day but I just don't believe he would ever would.
In any case, I really hope your DH gets the fair disciplinary process he's legally entitled to.

Excuse all the woulds*

Blanche I've never met any of his colleagues, and only have DH's version of what the disgruntled one is like. It was (apparently) an argument over who was working what shift that seems to have created a permanent bad atmosphere and DH often comes home with complaints about snide remarks etc.

Just picking up you’ve said he sufferers migraines. Mine can creep up on me and I have sometimes come across as slightly tipsy to people who do not know that I suffer migraines.

Migraine? Any possibility of undiagnosed diabetes?

He didn't have a migraine on the day in question. He doesn't have any obvious symptoms of diabetes and he had blood tests last year in relation to some unexplained pain he was suffering, and nothing was picked up other than a vitamin D deficiency, for which he now takes supplements.

So, the other colleagues that he did interact with that day? Will they support him/make a statement?

I forgot to say, thank you to everyone who has given advice and input; it's appreciated. I feel a bit calmer now. I will speak to my union helpline on Monday and see what they say.

clarry He can ask - we only got the letter in today's post so he hasn't seen anyone from work yet.

Good luck OP x

Thank you wiccababe.

Yes good luck. I have to say it sounds to me like he was either drunk (which doesn't sound so likely as you've explained) or it's malicious. If he'd felt ill or whatever wouldn't he suggest that as an explanation

Yes, I'd have remembered if he'd been ill, I think. I've been trying to remember that evening when he got back from work, but I was shattered as I'd been up since about 4am so I was just dozing on the sofa/messing round on the internet rather than having extensive conversation with him. I'm sure I would have noticed and been worried if he'd seemed intoxicated - I just don't remember anything out of the ordinary at all.

As a pp said they only need evidence 'on the balance of probability' that he did it but I can't see one word against another being good enough surely

I'd hope not. I find it hard to believe that someone who genuinely thought another person was drunk would let them continue their shift and drive a distance home without involving the police.

This happened to me many years ago. I was immediately suspended and then a week later called in to a meeting when an investigative document containing various witness statements was given to me. The fact that your DH has been allowed to carry on working makes this extremely odd, not least because of the driving aspect - the company would owe him a duty of care even if they suspected him of drinking on the job.

That's my thinking, Lobster. They would also surely have a duty of care to the public not to knowingly let an intoxicated employee be on the road without calling the police. DH is absolutely adamant that he'd had nothing to drink for two days before this alleged incident so a breath test would have shown him clear - and he's not on any medication other than vit D supplements.

Goaty, while I completely agree with the duty of care aspect, I'm pretty sure that unless it is specifically detailed in the employee handbook or similar, on the spot breathalyser tests cannot be administered. I speak (I'm afraid) as a fully paid up AA member of many years who knows a lot of people who've been in a similar situation and who most definitely have been guilty of drinking before work or while at work. I've never heard of the position that your DH finds himself in. The stories I've heard have been like mine - instant suspension, if applicable have called a relative or friend to have them escorted from the premises, following which an investigation has been carried out and a subsequent meeting arranged with the employee, line manger and HR representative present. At this meeting the case is put to the employee, and a time period given (usually a few days) during which time he/she can put together his/her defence.

Sorry, Lobster, I was being a bit garbled. What I meant was, in a situation where the employee accused of drinking started to drive home, and the employer called the police to report a DUI concern, the police would then administer a breath test. I wasn't suggesting the employers themselves would administer the test - I'm fairly sure there's no contractual basis for on-the-spot screening of any kind where he works.

Ah, I see. I've just read your OP again and it does sound like a straw-grasping exercise to me, given that you said his company weren't happy about his three sick days and two (? I think) snow days this year. I'd say he should be prepared to stay very calm, as a PP also said, in case they come out with a real hatchet job. I suppose the question is whether he'd want to stay in a job if it's been effectively spelt out that they are making up wild allegations. As before, I know a lot of people who've been suspended or dismissed instantly on the grounds of gross misconduct because they've been drinking at work, but never a case that's been handled in this manner.

Yes - whatever happens, he'll be looking for another job, Lobster as this has really upset him. He doesn't want to be submitting applications knowing his reference will state he's been dismissed for gross misconduct so I am just hoping the meeting won't have that outcome. I've asked him to write down everything he did that day in the run up to going to work, and I'll help him prepare a statement.

I was worried about him taking the sick days, but he really wasn't well enough to drive. He had the flu which went and came back (two days) and then a stomach bug (one day) and the two snow days - I believe the place had to close on at least one of the snow days as no-one could get in. Where I work, the three sick days this year would have triggered absence management procedures, but nothing seems to have been done other than him being moaned at by his manager.

It does sound as though there's a lot of complaining and sniping, probably on both sides, between him and the bloke he had the row with and it wouldn't surprise me if someone is tired of it - I'm tired of it myself and I've told DH to remain polite and distant, but he keeps coming home with new grumbles of 'he said this, and I said that' . But again, if this is the issue, it should be handled as such - wildcard misconduct allegations are not the way to go!

I will add that when I first saw the letter headed 'invitation to disciplinary meeting' my first thought was that it would be about the absences and they were going to accuse him of swinging the lead! The alcohol allegation was quite a shock.