Advice on co-worker taking drugs at work

Soldato
Joined
2 Aug 2012
Posts
7,809
Yes it does. And as with alcohol and other drugs, the more you do it the less it impacts your functionality. I've had cigarettes occasionally that have made me shaky and made it hard to concentrate. Same with caffeine.

You leave my coffee alone! I shall not have a bad word said about that tasty brown nectar :p


:cool: :D

In all seriousness, half a dozen coffees is enough to make me feel really rather strange, and probably a good bit more dangerous behind the wheel than half a dozen beers!
 
Associate
Joined
20 Mar 2012
Posts
2,308
Location
London(ish)
Yes it does. And as with alcohol and other drugs, the more you do it the less it impacts your functionality. I've had cigarettes occasionally that have made me shaky and made it hard to concentrate. Same with caffeine.

Alright, firstly the post I initially responded to was referring specifically to the effects of withdrawal.

Yeah, if you have a very strong nicotine hit then it makes you feel funny for a short time. Intoxicated is defined as "(of alcoholic drink or a drug) cause (someone) to lose control of their faculties or behavior" though, and I think it's fair to say that with normal doses of nicotine that's not the case. So yeah I know what you mean, but in the vast majority of cases nicotine shouldn't be considered intoxicating in the same way that e.g. 4 pints would be, because there's a very demonstrable decrease in cognitive ability after that which most smokers just won't get after a cigarette.

Now let's stop derailing this thread with a pointless debate about nothing important :)
 
Soldato
Joined
11 Jun 2015
Posts
11,087
Location
Bristol

:cool: :D

In all seriousness, half a dozen coffees is enough to make me feel really rather strange, and probably a good bit more dangerous behind the wheel than half a dozen beers!

I can remember once I was feeling particularly tired so I asked the barista at Nero to put an extra 3 shots of espresso in my large Latte, so 5 in total. She did look at me a bit perplexed but went on to make it. I thought I was going to have a heart attack and I was shaking like I was sat on a washing machine. Never again!
 
Caporegime
Joined
29 Jan 2008
Posts
58,898
Nah, not since Uni, about 25 years ago. :) All depends how much it affects his work imo.

If he's supposed to be supervising vulnerable teenagers then it isn't a very good example to set, nor is it a good response from management to shrug it off, especially using BS excuses like citing possible racism counter accusation (presumably simply because the guy is BAME) - that sort of mentality contributed to the grooming gang scandal and is in itself a form of soft bigotry/racism in itself... act differently around people of colour because they might pull the racism card out.

If he was a colleague at McDonald's then sure, ignore it and move on... but someone in a regulated profession dealing with vulnerable adults who thinks it's OK to get high when he's supposed to be supervising them... **** that, go back to management not accepting their fobbing off and/or turn whistleblower if nothing is done.
 
Soldato
Joined
8 Nov 2003
Posts
5,521
Location
Bedfordshire
Police would be very interested and this is a safeguarding issue. County drug lines is a big issue right now where vulnerable kids in homes are targeted to distribute drugs. If there's staff on board who openly use while the kids are in their care it could escalate to supply, taking advantage of them.

https://safeguardinghub.co.uk/county-lines-2019-update/

The fact the managers are trying to cover up this issue and not investigate further/nip it in the bud means further safeguarding training might be required.
 
Associate
Joined
15 Jan 2009
Posts
1,056
Location
On the wagon
What you might find is that her manager but knew they didn't have sufficient proof

A manager might quickly find some other, easier to prove context to quietly get rid him for which there is proof. For example, if he's as lazy and self centred as he sounds, he's almost certainly fabricated care records which would be easy to prove: the records claim you were with so and so in such and such a place at x time. However on reviewing CCTV for that location and time you cannot be seen.

Or the boss might be looking to catch him in the act of drug taking at work to remove the question of 'when'

I doubt the boss likes it any more than your partner but ultimately she's right. There's (currently anyway) no proof of when the drugs were taken and only your partners (probably accurate) word for what happened. It's too easy for him to deny and too hard for your partner and her boss to prove.

I'd be unhappy too but I think while your partner is morally in the right her boss is being more pragmatic. Hopefully it all ends up with him gone and unable to work in the field again regardless. If not I'd be having words with unions and the care commission. Managing the situation a different way to the way your partner expected and hoped is one thing. Failing to deal with it at all is another thing altogether.

She should write out a record of what occurred and when and who was there and what was said if appropriate. As. Quickly. As. She. Can. Then date the pieces. Hopefully she can get rid of them when he leaves but they might just be useful
 
Soldato
Joined
11 Sep 2013
Posts
12,299
There's (currently anyway) no proof of when the drugs were taken and only your partners (probably accurate) word for what happened. It's too easy for him to deny and too hard for your partner and her boss to prove.
Being a youth care facility, presumably there is CCTV that might just happen to catch something?
 
Soldato
Joined
29 Sep 2011
Posts
5,498
Location
Monkey Island
If the guy is not sensible enough to be able to smoke weed in his own time, without anybody knowing about it at work, smelling of weed etc.... then he is not responsible enough to be looking after children, end of story.

(just like having a drink in the evening and not turning up smelling of booze etc)
 
Soldato
Joined
10 May 2012
Posts
10,054
Location
Leeds
I mean I agree smoking weed at work is bad, he shouldn't be doing it, but he isn't shooting heroine here let's put things in perspective.
 
Soldato
Joined
19 Nov 2009
Posts
4,387
Location
Baa
In you other half's position, I'd make a complaint in writing (preferably email) to his boss.

Otherwise if something happens involving this chap further down the line then they might suddenly develop memory loss and deny ever having received your complaint.
 
Permabanned
Joined
11 Feb 2011
Posts
2,136
OP it's a small company, so they're not going to fart about with drug testing because one employee may or may not be doing it.

And to all the weed drug test experts in here, I passed mine FYI <12h.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
5 Dec 2003
Posts
20,997
Location
Just to the left of my PC
[..]
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)

Arse-covering, corporate style. But they're correct in both of the things you state "WTF?" about. The drug test for cannabis doesn't even test for cannabis. It tests for metabolites and is far too crude a test to prove time of use. It's a crap test, frankly. It should be obvious that playing the race card is a real thing nowadays and is a genuine risk for any business. Reality is irrelevant when guilt is presumed because people are deemed to be the wrong sex, the wrong "race" or whatever irrational prejudice is fashionable at the time.

The company's sole concern will be the company, so people at decision-making levels will be after the route of least damaging exposure. Doing anything about it will definitely result in negative exposure, extremely negative exposure if the person plays the race card. Doing nothing about it might result in no exposure and probably won't result in extremely bad exposure because the drug involved is cannabis, which currently has a good public reputation.

If she wants to take a risk by going against the company, she could push the issue within the company and threaten to escalate the issue by going public if the company doesn't meet her demands. That probably won't go well for her. The care industry is not exactly known for being considerate of its employees. She could try an "anonymous" (*) call to get the police to do something and then lie to her employers if they ask her about it. If he really is smoking cannabis at work, he'll probably be influenced enough to impair his driving and that would give her plausible deniability if the police did pull him over and test him. That would probably be her safest way if she's a good enough liar.


* It probably won't really be anonymous nowadays, of course, but it shouldn't be accessible to her employer.
 
Soldato
Joined
11 Sep 2013
Posts
12,299
CCTV sure. CCTV clear enough to clearly distinguish between a joint and a cig being smoked, presumably from the OP, in a car at night? Possibly not
But enough to support someone conveniently present, maybe a PCSO or passing beat bobby, who smells it and comes to investigate?
Better yet, how about one of the parents finding it?

OP it's a small company, so they're not going to fart about with drug testing because one employee may or may not be doing it.
And to all the weed drug test experts in here, I passed mine FYI <12h.
Tests cost as little as £50, apparently.
What would the costs be of a parent suing the care company when a junkie employee's negligence results in harm to or death of a child in their care?

Besides, I presume the company drugs policy will state something about being found to have drugs in one's system, regardless of when it was taken. Ours does - You might not have taken drugs for a week or more, but if they're still in you then you're out.
 
Back
Top Bottom