Advice on co-worker taking drugs at work

[ivrytwr3]

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.

So nothing to do with illegal drugs or working with children?

 

[Energize]

So nothing to do with illegal drugs or working with children?

You made a blanket statement that no one should ever use drugs in the workplace, no mention of children or illegal drugs.

 

[ttaskmaster]

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

No, I'm not, and you know it.
But since you mention it, it depends whether they're showing up to work with alcohol still in their system and whether it affects their work, appearance, conduct and general responsibilities of employment in accordance with company policy... just like any other drug, really.

But regardless of that - You said the issues were caused by the drugs being illegal. I therefore mentioned two very well known and widely used legal drugs, which still cause a variety of problems for many people and are still subject to certain restrictions, despite their legal status. Also, despite being legal, there is still an illegal market in at least one of those two.

 

[Haggisman]

No, I'm not, and you know it.

What if the person drinking a few beers at the weekend was actually 17? That would be illegal (assuming they bought them themselves), are they then untrustworthy?

But since you mention it, it depends whether they're showing up to work with alcohol still in their system and whether it affects their work, appearance, conduct and general responsibilities of employment in accordance with company policy... just like any other drug, really.

I agree with this point, as I'm sure any reasonable person would

But regardless of that - You said the issues were caused by the drugs being illegal. I therefore mentioned two very well known and widely used legal drugs, which still cause a variety of problems for many people and are still subject to certain restrictions, despite their legal status. Also, despite being legal, there is still an illegal market in at least one of those two.

I'm still confused about where your boundaries lie.

So, assuming both people turn up to work sober, clean, and do a good job every day:

Someone who enjoys a quiet spliff with a few mates on a Friday night, not affecting anyone else = bad & untrustworthy (because it's illegal)
Someone who goes out every Saturday night and drinks too much, makes a nuisance of themselves, and ends up passing out and needing to be escorted home by the police for their own safety = fine (because it's legal)

What level of illegal are we talking to make them cross that black and white line between trustworthy or not to you? Is downloading a few pirate songs ok? Driving at 1 mph over the speed limit? If you're going to draw that line at whether something is illegal or not (regardless of any moral or ethical considerations) then surely you need to do so consistently rather than arbitrarily picking and choosing?

 

[Junglist]

This thread makes me think of that 'The Streets' song Irony of it all.

 

[ttaskmaster]

What if the person drinking a few beers at the weekend was actually 17? That would be illegal (assuming they bought them themselves), are they then untrustworthy?

Quite possibly, yeah.

I'm still confused about where your boundaries lie.

That's because I'm using the boundaries that you specified, namely that the legality of a substance is the cause of problems, rather than the use of that substance.

Someone who enjoys a quiet spliff with a few mates on a Friday night, not affecting anyone else = bad & untrustworthy (because it's illegal)
Someone who goes out every Saturday night and drinks too much, makes a nuisance of themselves, and ends up passing out and needing to be escorted home by the police for their own safety = fine (because it's legal)

Are you asking me about this bit, or asserting this as your own argument?

What level of illegal are we talking to make them cross that black and white line between trustworthy or not to you?

Generally I've used company policy as the main line, and them being discovered crossing that line to be the point where they are no longer trustworthy... particularly in companies where they even tell you quite clearly and remind you frequently that such things are unacceptable. I've used that because it can, and often is, applied to a variety of substances, medications, actions and behaviours, regardless of legality... which is hopefully consistent enough for your pleads/demands, yes?

Is downloading a few pirate songs ok?

Depends who you work for. My mates at MTV were paranoid about anyone in their social circle pirating anything, because it could lead to difficulties at work. If you had a movie night at your house and screened a film that you'd downloaded off TPB, for example, they'd get up and leave the moment they found out.

 

[Smokey Deza]

"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.

I don't disagree, an ill-proportioned troll but I do generally advocate doing things out in the open where applicable. Despite my opinions, I don't really condone smoking at work and would certainly condemn such a thing at a care home. So I sympathise as the OPs partner has at the very least a valid point concerning the stench of it. It can be a nasty, vile smell to most, and to subject it to the very people you're caring for is quite the contrary of caring.

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.

K so on one hand they're stupid to be vocal about smoking it, but on the other if they stay schtum they're also deceitful for hiding it. Interesting rationale

Well personally I think you should generally merit staff on their performance. I think it's pretty folly to consider side lining your best workers just because they 'break the law' by chilling with a joint in the evening.

I never said that.

Indeed, but you didn't have to. It's quite obvious you have a zero tolerance towards anything illegal, drugs wise that is.

I'm just comparing what you gave me with my own experiences. You say experience is a factor in mitigating risk, here - Prove it

I quote tolerance because it's much more about that than experience, even if you mean them to be the same. You might have 10 years experience as a casual smoker, but you won't have that resistance I speak of.

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...

Um, you're the one that brought the law into it like it has some sort of bearing. It doesn't. The reason I brought up my co-worker.

I see you agree since you have just taken what I said waaay out of context and tried to par it off as 'whining'.

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

Not a fan of sarcasm then

Ok so to coin your term 'junkie' applies to those addicted to something. Note the earlier post mentioning TB (tolerance break) and the symptoms of withdrawal range from difficulty sleeping to omg weird dreams. For a week. A far cry away from heroin users which is actually what I think of when I hear junkie.

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?

Serious crimes? If there would be any moral implications involved it would be a bit beyond distrust at this point. That being said I still can't think of a scenario outside of that where their trust wouldn't be brought into question. Although I would probably entertain one or two depending on the nature of the crime.

 

[ttaskmaster]

K so on one hand they're stupid to be vocal about smoking it, but on the other if they stay schtum they're also deceitful for hiding it. Interesting rationale

They shouldn't be doing it in the first place, either way, so yeah.

Well personally I think you should generally merit staff on their performance.

I am... and in this case, they're doing something strictly forbidden by many a company policy. In ours, that is instant dismissal and they'll know damn well - They're ******* idiots. What more do you want?

Indeed, but you didn't have to. It's quite obvious you have a zero tolerance towards anything illegal, drugs wise that is.

So assuming unspoken meaning in my words too, then? OK, I can deal with that...
But whether I do or not still has nothing to do with the matter at hand, namely this magical tolerance that you assert governs whether a person is in a suitable condition to meet their responsibilities.

You might have 10 years experience as a casual smoker, but you won't have that resistance I speak of.

Until you demonstrate that an individual's level of resistance can be reliably measured and thus substantiated against a scale by which one can gauge their level of intoxication, you have no grounds for that useless argument.

Um, you're the one that brought the law into it like it has some sort of bearing. It doesn't. The reason I brought up my co-worker.
I see you agree since you have just taken what I said waaay out of context and tried to par it off as 'whining'.

So as a result of his alcohol use, he has rendered himself a highly undesirable and unproductive employee. Pretty sure that's not permitted by company policy, no? There's your law, there's your reasons, use that to get rid of him or shut up and get back to work.

Not a fan of sarcasm then

Only when it's done well. That really wasn't.

Ok so to coin your term 'junkie' applies to those addicted to something. Note the earlier post mentioning TB (tolerance break) and the symptoms of withdrawal range from difficulty sleeping to omg weird dreams. For a week. A far cry away from heroin users which is actually what I think of when I hear junkie.

It doesn't matter what you think.
It matters what your employer thinks, what those parents in the OP think, what a jury thinks, what the general public thinks, and what the law says.
If your addiction use affects your performance, you're a junkie. If your addiction is against the law, then you're a criminal too.
That is just the way it goes. Get over it.... and stay away from jobs with a zero tolerance policy.