I've Got Someone Sacked .....

I think the OP did the right thing. I've been in a similar situation, although with the person I had to deal with it was a drug issue. He was a good worker, but he was clearly under the influence at times, especially after lunch. I took him to one side, had a word and he appeared to improve over the next few weeks so I decided not to escalate the issue to management/HR.

Two months later he was caught in the toilets by security doing coke, in his disciplinary he brought up the fact I was aware he had a drug issue and had used at work. End result - he got sacked anyway and I get a royal rocket up my arse for trying to deal with it myself rather than involving HR.
 
That's a tricky one.

It's already happened tho, so nothing you can do to change it.

It's better than this possible alternative - You did nothing, he killed or seriously hurt someone due to his drinking.

Of course, hindsight might have appealed to your nicer side and told him to pull a sickie, but you cant change the past.

You did the right thing, don't listen to some of the ignorant **** wits in this thread, they obviously have no clue.
 
Robbie G said:
Strange how you're suddenly scared of assumptions when you've made about a million in your persecution of the OP's behaviour. Another example is that you're assuming the OP let the guy clock on and start operating the machinery, whereas he may have gone straight up to the manager's office while the guy was still getting changed or something.
Click to expand...

I never made any such assumption, only that he allowed the employee to enter the workplace. The OP has not clarified exactly what he did in any detail, the way it reads is that he took him to work as usual, didn't question the judgement of the person when he told him that he had a few beers several hours prior to being picked up or mention anything to him at all. When he arrived at work they went to work as usual and the OP reported his friend to the management. Who then was subsequently dismissed as per their contract.

He knew what would happen if his friend reported for work under the influence yet offered no advice or warning which leads me to question the judgement of the OP while still accepting that he has no responsibility for the actions or dismissal of the employee.

Robbie G said:
Also have you missed the part about summary dismissal for being under the influence being in their employment contract? He would have gotten sacked anyway if he was at home, work, or Timbuktu.
Click to expand...

Well he wouldn't have, because it is unlikely that any contract would have such a clause stopping the employee drinking whilst not at work. The moment he entered the workplace he became liable to the clause in his contract and not before, the OP knew this (as should the employee) yet he simply said nothing. I would question that kind of judgement.

Robbie G said:
He gave the guy a lift, during which he considered what actions he should take. We do not know the point in the journey at which OP was told, we do not know whether the OP allowed him to start operating the machinery before informing management. People do not always make perfect judgement calls in the spur of the moment (although I'm sure you do) and this should be allowed for also.
Click to expand...

I am certainly not one to claim to perfect judgement. I will however admit when such judgement calls are poor.

And while we should allow for all the things you state, the issue I have is that regardless at what point the OP was informed (even if it was in the firms Car park) he never made any comment to the person at all regards his actions. He simply drove him to work and reported him. I find that pretty hard to swallow regardless of where the responsibility lie. He was after all not just another employee, he was a Team-leader and should have shown some leadership in not allowing the employee to enter a factory under the influence or escorted him directly to his superior himself at the very least.
 
Last edited:
Haggisman said:
So what you're saying is that the drunk employee's behaviour has the potential to cost the OP his job (if it really does have as much impact on the other employees as you are suggesting), and yet somehow it's still the OP's fault?
Click to expand...

How the hell did you glean that from my post? It wont cost him his job at all.

I'm assuming the OP works in a manual environment, not too dissimilar to what is or was a unionised environment. The last thing you want to do is be found out to be is righteous, sycophantic, inflexible etc in an environment like this. I agree, in an ideal world the OP shouldn't have been put in this situation and it is totally the drunk guy's fault, however it's not an ideal world.

All I'm saying is that regardless of rules and what is technically the right thing to do, in this situation I don't think the OP's actions will have done him any favours.

Haggisman said:
Without the ability to see the future, the OP has no foolproof choice - he has made a judgement and has to live with the consequences (which shouldn't have been forced onto him), the only person in the wrong here is the employee who was drinking.
Click to expand...

I wholeheartedly agree with this but like I've said, I think due to the environment in which he works, whilst the OP has done nothing technically wrong, he hasn't chosen the best possible action to forward his career and help his working life.
 
Last edited:
I might have suggested he call in sick or take a personnal day or something, but it depends.

At the end of the day he should have known better, not your fault at all.
 
wab said:
Total coward, if I was your boss, you really not be a Happy bunny right now, and then you still brag about it no matter how your phrase your words.

I may now work for myself but for years I was a production/then operations manger and I have seen your type by the dozen.
Click to expand...

that is pretty low and only reflects how poor a boss you would have been.

Castiel said:
We have a very defined procedure with dealing with substance abuse that is separate from the normal disciplinary procedures.

I would seriously question the judgement of any supervisor who knowing allowed a driver to report for duty while under the influence, which is effectively what the OP did. I would expect the employee to be told to remain at home or at least refrain from reporting for duty and then we would initiate an investigation and disciplinary procedure including consideration as to the health and mental state of the employee.
Click to expand...

castiel, as a company director and someone of reasonable intellect, it is much easier for you to post your observations and to reflect on the ins and outs of what the op should and shouldn’t have done or how to apply policies and procedures. equally you are ultimately liable for the actions of your company and staff and so will be well versed in the content and application of your company policies.

i can probably rightly assume that most people at a team leader level like the op in this environment won't be highly paid or have the experience, wealth of training, capacity, insight and strategy mind-set to apply greater forethought in the ins and outs of company procedures and the law to have dealt with this; let alone the morality and any repercussions from other colleagues.

imo&e the op dealt with this very well,


Robbie G said:
The only person I can see that did that is clearly an illiterate ****wit that hasn't managed a thing in his life let alone a workforce.
Click to expand...

don't hold back lol
 
Malc said:
How the hell did you glean that from my post? It wont cost him his job at all.
Click to expand...

because if this is the case:

Malc said:
I'm assuming the OP works in a manual environment, not too dissimilar to what is or was a unionised environment. The last thing you want to do is be found out to be is righteous, sycophantic, inflexible etc in an environment like this.
Click to expand...

Then it's entirely possible that he will be made to feel so unwelcome that he will be forced to leave.

Malc said:
I wholeheartedly agree with this but like I've said, I think due to the environment in which he works, whilst the OP has done nothing technically wrong, he hasn't chosen the best possible action to forward his career and help his working life.
Click to expand...

What other option would you have suggested? Considering both of the other choices I mentioned could have had much worse repercussions.

Robbie G said:
The only person I can see that did that is clearly an illiterate ****wit that hasn't managed a thing in his life let alone a workforce.
Click to expand...

There have a been a couple =/
 
It may not be alberts fault for the guy being drunk but he certainly could have handled it better. I just hope that when Albert makes a mistake in his life ( which he will ) that someone who could have helped him makes the better decision.
 
Last edited:
sanaxe1 said:
It may not be alberts fault for the guy being drunk but albert certainly could have handled it better. I just hope that when Albert makes a mistake in his life ( which he will ) that someone who could have helped him makes the better decision.
Click to expand...

sorry but drinking 4 cans of beer before working with machinery is not a mistake, it is reckless stupidity.

doing something knowingly against your company policies and procedures which would result in gross misconduct is not a mistake at work.

mistakes at work are sending out a document with tracked changes still showing or stacking the goods in the wrong part of the warehouse.
 
mrk1@1 said:
castiel, as a company director and someone of reasonable intellect, it is much easier for you to post your observations and to reflect on the ins and outs of what the op should and shouldn’t have done or how to apply policies and procedures. equally you are ultimately liable for the actions of your company and staff and so will be well versed in the content and application of your company policies.
Click to expand...

You are probably correct, I cannot help but apply my experience as the OP wouldn't have been able to do. We do have very defined procedures and policies for this kind of incident, given the nature of our business it is required both morally and legally.

This is why I question, not the outcome or the necessity of reporting the incident, but the judgement of a team-leader in allowing an employee to enter the workplace under the influence knowingly.

mrk1@1 said:
i can probably rightly assume that most people at a team leader level like the op in this environment won't be highly paid or have the experience, wealth of training, capacity, insight and strategy mind-set to apply greater forethought in the ins and outs of company procedures and the law to have dealt with this; let alone the morality and any repercussions from other colleagues.
Click to expand...

Granted. I have given an opinion based on my own experience and assuming that, like us, a company with such health and safety concerns would also have strict procedures in place and that all the staff would be adequately trained to implement those procedures as per their assumed authority, a team-leader having the authority to limit access to the workplace in such an example as the OP.

mrk1@1 said:
imo&e the op dealt with this very well,
Click to expand...

I am not stating that he did not show due diligence, only that he may have handled the situation a little differently. Then again, so could the management themselves.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom