Advice on co-worker taking drugs at work

[Blackjack Davy]

This, wholeheartedly.
If there's any kind of regulatory body that covers them, drop them an anonymous email or two, as well. **** them.

Be a shame if someone left an anonymous note on one of the parents cars...

 

[Smokey Deza]

If you're the kind of person to break the law and obtain illegal substances for recreational purposes, your trustworthiness will be questionable.

What if you have an employee that meets all your expectations, but then later you discovered they're a cannabis user.

Do you suddenly no longer trust them, because they're breaking the law?

So just how experienced do you have to be, before you are immune from mistakes?

You're looking at it all wrong. 'Weed is illegal therefore it must be bad'. Just no.

You think the employee described by the OP is bad? He is an extremely mild version of my alcoholic co-worker. A guy that gets legally intoxicated every night only to stumble into work late the next day and does sweet fa until 15:00. The polar opposite of me, I might add.

But hey, maybe I'm bias. I'm just a 'junkie' drug addict after all, who's probably never been entrusted with any responsibilities.

the area manager has given her low marks in any area relating to teamwork

Well to be fair, grassing on your co-workers is not good for moral.

 

[AHarvey]

What if you have an employee that meets all your expectations, but then later you discovered they're a cannabis user.

Do you suddenly no longer trust them, because they're breaking the law?



You're looking at it all wrong. 'Weed is illegal therefore it must be bad'. Just no.

You think the employee described by the OP is bad? He is an extremely mild version of my alcoholic co-worker. A guy that gets legally intoxicated every night only to stumble into work late the next day and does sweet fa until 15:00. The polar opposite of me, I might add.

But hey, maybe I'm bias. I'm just a 'junkie' drug addict after all, who's probably never been entrusted with any responsibilities.



Well to be fair, grassing on your co-workers is not good for moral.

As a non-drug user I was with you right up until that last line.

"Grassing on a co-worker is not good for morale". Neither is working with someone that isn't pulling their weight nor is it when you take pride in the work you do but they aren't. being intoxicated of any kind at work, especially while in charge of minors isn't great and nor should it be tolerated.

 

[ttaskmaster]

What if you have an employee that meets all your expectations, but then later you discovered they're a cannabis user.
Do you suddenly no longer trust them, because they're breaking the law?

I'd certainly be questioning their trustworthiness, yeah. That they would knowingly break the law, and that they would hide it, knowing full well it was a factor in their employability from the start, is definite cause for concern.

You're looking at it all wrong. 'Weed is illegal therefore it must be bad'. Just no.

I never said that.
I'm just comparing what you gave me with my own experiences. You say experience is a factor in mitigating risk, here - Prove it, and demonstrate how it can be applied in a practical sense, to determine whether or not any given individual presents a risk.

You think the employee described by the OP is bad? He is an extremely mild version of my alcoholic co-worker. A guy that gets legally intoxicated every night only to stumble into work late the next day and does sweet fa until 15:00.

So what?
If the guy is a problem, do something about it. Don't come here whining about how your chosen vice is illegal, as it solves nothing and does you no favours...

But hey, maybe I'm bias. I'm just a 'junkie' drug addict after all, who's probably never been entrusted with any responsibilities.

Well at least you're able to admit your problem...

 

[Junglist]

But hey, maybe I'm bias. I'm just a 'junkie' drug addict after all, who's probably never been entrusted with any responsibilities.

You’re on to a hiding for nothing I’m afraid. There are those two think a blanket ban on anyone who took a substance whilst it’s detectable in your system is a fair course of action and those who do not.

You’ll just end up going in circles

 

[NVP]

To be fair, I know users who are homeless and users who earn more than twice as much as me. I know of chav thieves through to brickies and sparkies all the way through to well respected doctors and solicitors.

Those outside of these types of circles would be extremely surprised to find out the vast array of people who regularly toke.

 

[ttaskmaster]

There are those two think a blanket ban on anyone who took a substance whilst it’s detectable in your system is a fair course of action and those who do not.

Any other approaches would be similarly bemoaned as unfair, disproportionate, etc, depending on individuals' subjective requirements.
Like I said, until you get measures more substantial and reliable, there is only that one option of a blanket ban, though.

 

[Orionaut]

What if you have an employee that meets all your expectations, but then later you discovered they're a cannabis user.

Do you suddenly no longer trust them, because they're breaking the law?

What if you have an employee that meets all your expectations, but then later you discovered they routinely and wilfully engage in serious criminal behaviour of any sort?

(Serious in that the consequences of being caught at it are serious. We are not talking about doing 35 in a 30 here)

Do you suddenly no longer trust them, because they're breaking the law?

 

[Haggisman]

What if you have an employee that meets all your expectations, but then later you discovered they routinely and wilfully engage in serious criminal behaviour of any sort?

(Serious in that the consequences of being caught at it are serious. We are not talking about doing 35 in a 30 here)

Do you suddenly no longer trust them, because they're breaking the law?

I'd argue that depends on what sort of criminal activity it is.

Drug use is a crime that doesn't directly* harm anyone else, whereas the majority of other crimes do (or at least have the potential to do so). My point of view would be that if they aren't hurting anyone then what's the problem? Completely different to finding out they were e.g. a rapist or burglar.

* obviously there are the indirect effects, e.g. Stealing to feed a habit etc. but then that could also apply to legal activities such as gambling etc.

 

[do_ron_ron]

My other half works as a live-in careworker looking after children. It's a small company, heirarchy is
Owner>area manager>house managers.
In the particular house she works in the children are a little older and mature (15 and 16 iirc) but there should always be 2 members of staff on site with 2 children.


A fairly new member of staff has had some weird behaviour, work really sloppy, disappearing off at will to go and get himself a takeaway etc.
Constantly going for smoke breaks, eats a couple of mouthfuls of food at meal time then bins the rest. quite a few other bits as well but nothing significant.

Last night, my partner said she could smell weed on him, and he went out to his car for a smoke and when he came back in the smell was even stronger, his eyes were all bloodshot and he avoided conversation with her, he made his excuses, grabbed a drink and some snacks and went to bed for the night, but the smell was so strong that it remained in the kitchen for a while after he left.

She immediately contacted her manager (who was at home at the time), who in turn has contacted the area manager.
They have pretty much said that they aren't going to act on it because
- it will be her word against his
- a drug test wouldn't prove he was doing it on shift (WTF), he could have done it in his own time, he might have done it in his own time and the smell was in his car then when he sat in it on his break it then transferred to his clothes without him actually smoking it.
- he might turn it around as her being racist (again WTF)

I am now self employed but at my last place of work, they did random drugs tests, and regardless of when they were taken if you had drugs in your system it would be instant dismissal.
Further by their logic, he could have walked to work smoking a joint (or drinking etc) and stubbed it out before starting shift and that would be ok ??

I am shocked to see that company that is supposed to be caring for children doesn't take something like this extremely seriously.

She doesn't know what to do as it seems they are brushing this under the carpet now.

fwiw she gets on with her manager, their is no bad blood between them.

It would not matter if he took the drugs at home, while he is there he is responsible for the children left in his care. The last place I worked as a teacher had a residence for children who could not go home and any care worker caught doing drink or drugs would have been sent home and dismissed the following day.
The care worker is responsible for any emergency with the child or the residence and being on drugs puts the children at risk.
I am surprised and shocked that management are so blase about the matter. Certainly a matter for the local authority protection team.

 

[ttaskmaster]

Drug use is a crime that doesn't directly* harm anyone else, whereas the majority of other crimes do (or at least have the potential to do so). My point of view would be that if they aren't hurting anyone then what's the problem?

Part of the problem is all the indirect and related effects, though.
It's how those kids will be influenced by the knowledge that their carer is a drug user, it's all the laws you have to break in getting your illegal drugs and the laws that have to be broken in getting them to you, any other enterprises your dealership network might be involved in as part and parcel of the industry, it's how such knowledge would be received by the general public and how it reflects on the company... and many other such things.
It's the same as buying a cheap knock-off DVD off those Chinese sellers you used to get coming round pubs. You think it's innocent enough and not hurting anyone, until you find that those sales really do fund terrorism, organised crime and illegal immigration (migrants sell the discs to work off the cost of their passage), and underpin many other such crimes associated with such groups. Several were found to also be selling DVDs with other very explicit sexual content, involving animals and children.
Drugs are often not the most profitable market for criminal groups these days, but they are still the big players in all of that.

But even leaving aside all of that for just a moment... You will be told about the company policy on drugs and tolerance or lack of, as well as advised of any routine drugs screening and any chance of random screening. If, when forewarned about all of that, you are still unable to keep off the drugs sufficiently to pass screening, then you clearly don't want the job enough.
Pick up your P45 on your way out.

 

[Haggisman]

All of those issues are caused by the fact that drugs are illegal, not by the consumption of drugs themselves.

Just look at what happened to organised crime during prohibition!

 

[ttaskmaster]

All of those issues are caused by the fact that drugs are illegal, not by the consumption of drugs themselves.

And how has it worked out for users of legalised drugs like alcohol and tobacco?
Can't have it both ways, you know... no matter what gender you try and identify as!!

 

[MissChief]

And how has it worked out for users of legalised drugs like alcohol and tobacco?
Can't have it both ways, you know... no matter what gender you try and identify as!!

People aren’t allowed to smoke inside any more and try drinking on the job or turning up drunk and see how far you’d get?!

 

[ttaskmaster]

People aren’t allowed to smoke inside any more and try drinking on the job or turning up drunk and see how far you’d get?!

My point exactly. Why should illegal drugs be any different?

My main pont still stands, though. The company policy prohibits it and tells you so quite clearly... so what leg could you possibly have to stand upon?

 

[ivrytwr3]

You should not be using any form of non-prescribed drug in the workplace, this is especially prevalent when dealing with children.

And as for the workplace, they have bottled this and handled it completely wrong.

As for the OPs Mrs - she has done the right thing, unfortunately, by the way work have handled this, she is more than likely seen as causing issues - sucks to be her, but that is society sometimes.

 

[Haggisman]

And how has it worked out for users of legalised drugs like alcohol and tobacco?
Can't have it both ways, you know... no matter what gender you try and identify as!!

So you're suggesting that if you found out someone was having a few beers of a weekend, you'd feel they were less trustworthy? Because that's the point I was responding to

 

[alchal]

Having worked with multiple people who enjoy a 'spliff or three' during the working day I can say that they are the hardest bunch of people to get working I have ever known!

I'm sure some can handle it better than others but from my experience especially in the engineering world ,work and weed don't mix!

 

[Junglist]

work and weed don't mix!

It's a waste of weed for sure. Though when I had my first Christmas temp job it certainly made working at Argos tolerable

 

[Energize]

You should not be using any form of non-prescribed drug in the workplace, this is especially prevalent when dealing with children.

And as for the workplace, they have bottled this and handled it completely wrong.

As for the OPs Mrs - she has done the right thing, unfortunately, by the way work have handled this, she is more than likely seen as causing issues - sucks to be her, but that is society sometimes.

Depends on the workplace really.

A lot of trendy businesses like design agencies have beer/wine fridges, we had ours stocked with spirits also and it didn't cause a problem. People would regularly have a pint with their lunch.