So Who Takes a Breathalizer for Alcohol Every Day at Work?

AKBill

AKBill

En-Route
Joined
Nov 29, 2014
Messages
3,735
Location
Juneau, AK
Display Name
Display name:
AKBill
Sorry this post is so long, I wanted to give you all the details.

I ride a boat to work every day. 45 minute boat ride, then a bus ride for 40 minutes to get to the mine site. Dress out, go underground for a 9 hour shift. Dock to dock is 14 hours.

Before getting on the boat my company has everyone blow in a breathalyzer. Boat leaves at 5am, I'm normally show up at 4:25 am. Company policy is .02 alcohol or less. You fail the test and you are terminated and can NEVER be rehired.

A coworker who had 22 years with the company was fired this week. Great guy, good worker, always gave 110%. He made a mistake. Never allowed to be rehired after 22 years service. This coworker has never missed a work day/shift in 22 years. I have a problem with the policy.

Lay him off for 6 months, rehire him and if he screws up again then put he hammer down and never rehire him.

I am trying to get the company policy changed. The change would allow anyone fired the ability to reapply for a job in 6 months.

Can anyone think of a way to change a company policy such ad this.

Thanks

Bill Burgett
Juneau, SK
 
The only way I can think of to get the policy changed would be for the CEO to fail the test very publicly.

However, breathalyzers can be wrong and there appears to be no way to dispute a false positive. That might be the correct approach. Is there a Union and/or contract?
 
Also, is boarding the boat considered reporting for work? When does the clock start. A lot can happen to a BAC level over 85 minutes on boats and buses.
 
No union.. Maybe that is what it would take. Management has always down graded unions. Everyone is afraid of loosing their job if they vote "UNION"
 
If it's that big of a deal, everybody walk off the job and protest. That has always worked in the past. If all your coworkers are good with the policy, then quit and find a regular job in the regular USA. I have never known anybody that had to do that crap.
 
I watched some supervisor of some guys working on a ranch buying whiskey for his crew for a little mid-day "holiday cheer" at a local store this morning. He wasn't shy about saying that was why he was buying large quantities of whiskey at 08:00 either.

Sounded like they were knocking off a little early on the ranch today to have a little party.

Just thought it was an interesting contrast to this post.

In the more corporate world of multiple companies under one roof including a call center for drug testing results...

We just threw a pot luck for the holidays which probably induced diabetes, obesity, and heart disease in nearly everyone present -- judging by the food we all ate.

And in true PoA fashion: I brought coleslaw. Haha. No, really.
 
Looks like they had a problem with folks showing up drunk.

What is your state law on employer drug testing?

I am confused. Is there a Juneau in Saskatchewan.
 
Seems simple. If the guy knowingly violated a condition of employment then he controlled his own fate. If he believes the test results were incorrect and that he was wrongly terminated he should get a lawyer and explore his options.

As for policy changes? Most companies don't let employees dictate condition of employment policies. Be careful.
 
While I understand that the policy seems unreasonable the employer particularly in a mining job faces a huge amount of risk for liability with an employee working under the influence that could not only effect the employee but those they work with (understand this is true of many jobs). I feel bad for the the guy but he knew the rules he should have called in sick if he knew he wasn't going to blow a good number. I imagine like most places there isn't a shortage of workers there so probably no real reason for the employer to change their policy.
 
Stewartb said:
Seems simple. If the guy knowingly violated a condition of employment then he controlled his own fate. If he believes the test results were incorrect and that he was wrongly terminated he should get a lawyer and explore his options.

As for policy changes? Most companies don't let employees dictate condition of employment policies. Be careful.
Click to expand...

Sorry for the OP's friend, but gotta agree with Stewartb.

I know it sux, but if he knew that there was the slightest chance he'd get nailed, he should have called out for the day. Get a home breath-testing unit (if there is one) to check themselves before heading off to what could be their last day at work... Or simply give up the sauce all together... (at least 24 hours before work) It's a tough rule but I don't think its unreasonable... One strike you're out, yes, but one mistake might take a bunch of people "out!" Risk management. What a concept, eh?
 
I'm sure this all boils down to insurance. I doubt the company is voluntarily going through the trouble to breath test all the employees every day, without some insurance company requiring it to either write a policy or provide a discount to it.

That said, .02 seems pretty low... I could see blowing that if you used some mouthwash and headed straight to the boat.
 
Sounds like a company who's trying their hardest to "earn" themself a union.
 
Is there a history on this?
Almost sounds like the company has had an alcohol involved injury or large # of tardies/absences in the past due to alcohol.
Sometimes there is a story behind the story, and once you hear it, all becomes clear.
 
ifly4fun said:
That said, .02 seems pretty low... I could see blowing that if you used some mouthwash and headed straight to the boat.
Click to expand...

That won't work. swish and blow immediately, yes with Listerine. however, alcohol dissipates rapidly in the mouth. you'd have to drink and blow immediately.

PBT, PASD or PABT devices use deep lung samples.
 
What did he blow?

AKBill said:
Sorry this post is so long, I wanted to give you all the details.

I ride a boat to work every day. 45 minute boat ride, then a bus ride for 40 minutes to get to the mine site. Dress out, go underground for a 9 hour shift. Dock to dock is 14 hours.

Before getting on the boat my company has everyone blow in a breathalyzer. Boat leaves at 5am, I'm normally show up at 4:25 am. Company policy is .02 alcohol or less. You fail the test and you are terminated and can NEVER be rehired.

A coworker who had 22 years with the company was fired this week. Great guy, good worker, always gave 110%. He made a mistake. Never allowed to be rehired after 22 years service. This coworker has never missed a work day/shift in 22 years. I have a problem with the policy.

Lay him off for 6 months, rehire him and if he screws up again then put he hammer down and never rehire him.

I am trying to get the company policy changed. The change would allow anyone fired the ability to reapply for a job in 6 months.

Can anyone think of a way to change a company policy such ad this.

Thanks

Bill Burgett
Juneau, SK
Click to expand...
 
AKBill said:
Sorry this post is so long, I wanted to give you all the details.

I ride a boat to work every day. 45 minute boat ride, then a bus ride for 40 minutes to get to the mine site. Dress out, go underground for a 9 hour shift. Dock to dock is 14 hours.

Before getting on the boat my company has everyone blow in a breathalyzer. Boat leaves at 5am, I'm normally show up at 4:25 am. Company policy is .02 alcohol or less. You fail the test and you are terminated and can NEVER be rehired.

A coworker who had 22 years with the company was fired this week. Great guy, good worker, always gave 110%. He made a mistake. Never allowed to be rehired after 22 years service. This coworker has never missed a work day/shift in 22 years. I have a problem with the policy.

Lay him off for 6 months, rehire him and if he screws up again then put he hammer down and never rehire him.

I am trying to get the company policy changed. The change would allow anyone fired the ability to reapply for a job in 6 months.

Can anyone think of a way to change a company policy such ad this.

Thanks

Bill Burgett
Juneau, SK
Click to expand...

Step 1) Buy the company.

Step 2) Change the policy.
 
AKBill said:
No union.. Maybe that is what it would take. Management has always down graded unions. Everyone is afraid of loosing their job if they vote "UNION"
Click to expand...

I am not a big fan of unions, but the employer cannot fire an employee for trying to organize labor. That is an "unfair labor practice." The NLRB looks at that pretty harshly. Certainly, under the Obama administration, that wouldn't fly. (Not trying to be political, and not trying to say that is good or bad. Just that Obama's NLRB is very much pro union.) Not sure about under the new administration.

For more information, see: https://www.flra.gov/cases/unfair-labor-practice
 
Unit74 said:
Please qualify this assertion.
Click to expand...

A toxicologist expert that I have retained in some matters, who was at one time the State Director of Toxicology of my state, and who wrote the regulations on the use of breathalyzers in my state, advised me that they are only accurate at the specific quantity for which they are calibrated. If they are calibrated to 0.08 percent, that can only be trusted as to the actual BAC at that level. If they read higher or lower than the amount for which they were calibrated, then all you know is whether the test recipient's BAC is higher or lower than that amount. So, if it's calibrated to 0.08, and someone blows 0.02, you do not know that it is actually 0.02. You just know it's somewhere under 0.08.
 
That was a big mistake, alcoholism causes issues like this. The guy knew the stakes and should have stayed home. That said, firing a 22 year employee for a first infraction does seem harsh, but who knows the back story. It seems to me that a miner not only takes his own life in his hands, but also the lives of many of his coworkers, it's a pretty selfish decision to attempt to do that job under the influence. I don't know, seems the company is protecting its employees, and of course itself with this rule, not sure it's worth bringing in a union over.
 
I agree with PPC1052. Generally the hand held breath tests are not admissible in court for the purpose of establishing a specific BAC. There are generally used to establish probably cause that alcohol has been consumed or an individual is under the influence. The margin of error for the hand held devices is significantly higher than a blood test or intoxolizer.

If the reading came back at .025 its a different situation than if it's .10. The .025 would be within the standard deviation I suspect.

As other have said, I'd guess this is primarily a liability issue.
 
Yes, however, it can easily be shown to be absolutely negligible difference when using the calibrated test solutions, eg. a .08 calibrated device with a .201 solution reading .204.

Now if the device can be shown to be faulty, now you have a better position. but you need to have it independently testing at your expense.

I've been through several instructors courses for intoximters and alco-sensor and that's been my experience.



PPC1052 said:
A toxicologist expert that I have retained in some matters, who was at one time the State Director of Toxicology of my state, and who wrote the regulations on the use of breathalyzers in my state, advised me that they are only accurate at the specific quantity for which they are calibrated. If they are calibrated to 0.08 percent, that can only be trusted as to the actual BAC at that level. If they read higher or lower than the amount for which they were calibrated, then all you know is whether the test recipient's BAC is higher or lower than that amount. So, if it's calibrated to 0.08, and someone blows 0.02, you do not know that it is actually 0.02. You just know it's somewhere under 0.08.
Click to expand...
 
Coincidentally I was talking to someone a few days ago who used to work for an overseas (Indian?) airline where they were required to do this.

As far as changing company policy, I'm not sure anyone here knows how your management feels about items such as retention, training costs for a new hire, employee morale, etc. If people are unhappy enough and walk out, would they be able to easily find replacements?
 
Your thinking about the older equipment generally. Take a look at some of the latest equipment such as the Point of Arrest systems.

And the issue with the portables in the past were not necessarily the devices, it was the time between test and evidentiary sample. then the argument becomes "What was the BAC at the time of Arrest, or the actual sampling for evidence."

The new PoA systems take care of that generally and only leaves you to attack the equipment, operator or PC for stop.



scorpio said:
I agree with PPC1052. Generally the hand held breath tests are not admissible in court for the purpose of establishing a specific BAC. There are generally used to establish probably cause that alcohol has been consumed or an individual is under the influence. The margin of error for the hand held devices is significantly higher than a blood test or intoxolizer.

If the reading came back at .025 its a different situation than if it's .10. The .025 would be within the standard deviation I suspect.

As other have said, I'd guess this is primarily a liability issue.
Click to expand...
 
AKBill said:
No union.. Maybe that is what it would take. Management has always down graded unions. Everyone is afraid of loosing their job if they vote "UNION"
Click to expand...
Really? From where are they going to get "replacements"? For the record, I'm not a union supporter, but in this case...

What are you mining?
 
Here's a shocker - I'm anti-union. Always have been, and probably always will be.

In my 20's I was subject to annual testing and random testing. (Chemical plant owned by Oil Company). The guys made a stink because originally it was only required of hourly employees. Sure, I'll concede that point. Everyone or no one.

Here's the odd thing. The annual testing was normally 1 week before or after your birthday. They used birthdays because it spread things out more. Hiring tended to be in groups so it clustered up our scheduling. Everyone knew this. And if you didn't know it, when you started talking about your birthday coming up you were reminded and sometimes encouraged to get it done before, so as not to mess up your party plans. People still failed. What's that tell you?

The other trigger for a test was damaging plant equipment. Hit a bump post, get a taxi ride to the doctor.

Question for the OP: IF you get on the boat, but then cannot work, is there another boat before the shift ends or someplace to wait it out? The area sounds remote enough that before boarding is the best place to give up your sample.
 
Let'sgoflying! said:
Is there a history on this?
Almost sounds like the company has had an alcohol involved injury or large # of tardies/absences in the past due to alcohol.
Sometimes there is a story behind the story, and once you hear it, all becomes clear.
Click to expand...
Based on the location and job conditions, I'd think being loaded is the only way to get through it!
 
Everskyward kinda beat me to it. They're in business to make money. Can they make more money if they change their policy? Avoid cost of training and integrating a new hire into the crew. Does his 22 years of experience make him much more efficient or productive than someone with 1 year, or 5 years? The numbers may not work out in this particular instance, but that is where I would start.
 
PPC1052 said:
I am not a big fan of unions, but the employer cannot fire an employee for trying to organize labor. That is an "unfair labor practice." The NLRB looks at that pretty harshly. Certainly, under the Obama administration, that wouldn't fly. (Not trying to be political, and not trying to say that is good or bad. Just that Obama's NLRB is very much pro union.) Not sure about under the new administration.

For more information, see: https://www.flra.gov/cases/unfair-labor-practice
Click to expand...

There are ways around those protections. Walmart had a store where the butcher counter employees unionized. Walmart decided to switch to prepackaged meat and got rid of the entire department. I'm sure they just called it a "business decision" that had nothing to do with the fact they were union.
 
paflyer said:
Really? From where are they going to get "replacements"? For the record, I'm not a union supporter, but in this case...
Click to expand...

Juneau would be considered a relatively small town in the lower 48. But a large town by Alaska standards. As for the labor pool, it is small and you have to hire the same people over and over again.

Lots of mines in the area, but like in aviation, word gets around quickly. Seems like the miners I carried all mostly detested their jobs but loved the paychecks.
 
I guess I assumed they had a less substantial device than a new high quality POA system. I agree they are reliable. In my neck of the woods a hand-held alco sensor is used as part of the battery of tests to establish PC. Then off to have a blood draw, or occasionally the intoxilyzer.
 
Stewartb said:
Seems simple. If the guy knowingly violated a condition of employment then he controlled his own fate. If he believes the test results were incorrect and that he was wrongly terminated he should get a lawyer and explore his options.

As for policy changes? Most companies don't let employees dictate condition of employment policies. Be careful.
Click to expand...

That's the sad thing, my coworker did drink the day before he went to work. Went to bed 7pm and still tested positive. He did not knowingly violate the policy, said he thought he was good to go.

Be careful is an understatement...
 
:(
ifly4fun said:
I'm sure this all boils down to insurance. I doubt the company is voluntarily going through the trouble to breath test all the employees every day, without some insurance company requiring it to either write a policy or provide a discount to it.

That said, .02 seems pretty low... I could see blowing that if you used some mouthwash and headed straight to the boat.
Click to expand...

Another coworker uses mouth wash in the morning, two days in a row he tested positive. He was told to change his personal hygiene habits so he dose not test positive...:(
 
Well, I have been self employed as long as most of you have been alive
Further, I don't drink so I will cheerfully blow into the analyzer anytime an employer wants (no street drugs either)
So, as you probably suspect by this third sentence I'd say he got what he had coming
You have the right not to work there
What you don't have the right to do is to injure the owners business because you are looking for a way to excuse your inability to control your behavior
You don't like it?
Leave!
 
If there is any chance of testing positive,call in sick. The test should be administered at the work location on company time.
 
Zeldman said:
Juneau would be considered a relatively small town in the lower 48. But a large town by Alaska standards. As for the labor pool, it is small and you have to hire the same people over and over again.

Lots of mines in the area, but like in aviation, word gets around quickly. Seems like the miners I carried all mostly detested their jobs but loved the paychecks.
Click to expand...

I do like my work underground and the paychecks are good. Work 9hrs, get paid for 11hrs, gone 14hrs a day. Corporate U.S. today is way different than 30 years ago... Seems like one person does something management disapproves of and everyone is penalized.

At one time we had sick days, 3 per year. Call in no questions, well the kids took advantage of that now no sick days...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top