Using alcohol while on a job

[nickg1988]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? TX....if we suspect a employee drinking on the job**************...what do we need to do to terminate him legally? Do we have to offer him a leave?

 

[Ohiogal]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? TX....if we suspect a employee drinking on the job**************...what do we need to do to terminate him legally? Do we have to offer him a leave?

If the job is a union job, you have to follow union rules by way of contract.

 

[nickg1988]

It's a non-union

 

[HorseUrodeInOn]

You don't really need a good reason to terminate them "legally". As long as he's not being terminated for a protected characteristic (think race, religion, etc.) he can be fired at anytime for any reason including "We just don't want you to work here anymore". This assumes that there is no employment contract that provides otherwise.

 

[Silverplum]

http://www.twc.state.tx.us/news/efte/pay_and_policies_general.html

 

[commentator]

If you do not want to pay the cost of his unemployment benefits after you fire him, which is the only downside to firing someone in a non union situation (where there is no danger of an EEOC issue being involved, and where he has not just recently been on Worker's Comp, something like that,) then you should begin by giving a refresher to ALL employees about what company rules are regarding alcohol and drug use. Then, I'd suggest that you call in this particular employee, preferably on one of the occasions when you suspect he has been drinking, and warn him that "we have some reason to believe that you may have been drinking on the job. If this happens or is reported to us again, or we have any reason to believe that it has happened, we will be terminating you." He may throw a fit and jump up and leave at this point. So be it. No unemployment there.

He may wildly deny it, may demand to know who told on him, etc. You do not have to tell him anything. Just repeat that if you find that he has been drinking on the job, he will be terminated. Keep a record of the date you have this meeting with him. This is his warning.

Then wait. If he does mess up again, you fire him on the spot. Do not postpone the action, take it as soon as you believe he has violated the policy. It was his choice to change his behavior and keep the job, or his choice to take a chance, do it again and be fired. Thus he is not going to be approved for unemployment. He knew it was against the rules, he was warned, he did what he had been warned about, and he was terminated.

If he comes in obviously drunk and reeking and impaired, fire him on the spot, forget the warnings. This is considered gross misconduct, no warnings necessary, he is fired, and no unemployment benefits.

But if you just have something vague like somebody said they noticed he came to work a couple of weeks ago smelling like alcohol, you could go on and fire him now, without further ado, but the thing is, if he files a claim for unemployment, which he probably would do, and you have fired him without warning him and he denies that he did what you accused him of, and you let him keep working for another week or month after the supposed incident, he's likely going to be approved for unemployment benefits. This would cause your employer tax rate to go up.

The way to avoid this is to have firm policies about such things, give warnings and document those warnings, and then follow through with progressive discipline up to and including termination for violation of these policies. Get rid of your losers quick. They may mouthe off about getting a lawyer and suing your ass, etc. But in reality, they have no cause, they have not been terminated wrongly, and there's nothing they can do to you. But if you let them linger on the job, not only could they cause serious harm, not only could they fake an injury, or actually hurt themselves or someone else on the job, but they open you up to all sorts of liability as they represent your company.

I saw a case where this employee who was quite good at his job had smoked marijuana on the job for years. The employer was aware of it, and sort of turned a blind eye to it. Then he got angry at the man for something else entirely, and called him in one fine day and fired him for smoking pot on the job. This claimant actually got approved to draw unemployment. The employer had been aware of what he was doing, had never given him any warnings or indications that his behavior was unacceptable. So if you have an employee that "you believe" is drinking on the job, get on it and get rid of him/her.

 

[Bali Hai]

If you do not want to pay the cost of his unemployment benefits after you fire him, which is the only downside to firing someone in a non union situation (where there is no danger of an EEOC issue being involved, and where he has not just recently been on Worker's Comp, something like that,) then you should begin by giving a refresher to ALL employees about what company rules are regarding alcohol and drug use. Then, I'd suggest that you call in this particular employee, preferably on one of the occasions when you suspect he has been drinking, and warn him that "we have some reason to believe that you may have been drinking on the job. If this happens or is reported to us again, or we have any reason to believe that it has happened, we will be terminating you." He may throw a fit and jump up and leave at this point. So be it. No unemployment there.

He may wildly deny it, may demand to know who told on him, etc. You do not have to tell him anything. Just repeat that if you find that he has been drinking on the job, he will be terminated. Keep a record of the date you have this meeting with him. This is his warning.

Then wait. If he does mess up again, you fire him on the spot. Do not postpone the action, take it as soon as you believe he has violated the policy. It was his choice to change his behavior and keep the job, or his choice to take a chance, do it again and be fired. Thus he is not going to be approved for unemployment. He knew it was against the rules, he was warned, he did what he had been warned about, and he was terminated.

If he comes in obviously drunk and reeking and impaired, fire him on the spot, forget the warnings. This is considered gross misconduct, no warnings necessary, he is fired, and no unemployment benefits.

But if you just have something vague like somebody said they noticed he came to work a couple of weeks ago smelling like alcohol, you could go on and fire him now, without further ado, but the thing is, if he files a claim for unemployment, which he probably would do, and you have fired him without warning him and he denies that he did what you accused him of, and you let him keep working for another week or month after the supposed incident, he's likely going to be approved for unemployment benefits. This would cause your employer tax rate to go up.

The way to avoid this is to have firm policies about such things, give warnings and document those warnings, and then follow through with progressive discipline up to and including termination for violation of these policies. Get rid of your losers quick. They may mouthe off about getting a lawyer and suing your ass, etc. But in reality, they have no cause, they have not been terminated wrongly, and there's nothing they can do to you. But if you let them linger on the job, not only could they cause serious harm, not only could they fake an injury, or actually hurt themselves or someone else on the job, but they open you up to all sorts of liability as they represent your company.

I saw a case where this employee who was quite good at his job had smoked marijuana on the job for years. The employer was aware of it, and sort of turned a blind eye to it. Then he got angry at the man for something else entirely, and called him in one fine day and fired him for smoking pot on the job. This claimant actually got approved to draw unemployment. The employer had been aware of what he was doing, had never given him any warnings or indications that his behavior was unacceptable. So if you have an employee that "you believe" is drinking on the job, get on it and get rid of him/her.

WAY easier said than done. Most employees don't work for a mom and pop store these days.

 

[commentator]

And that changes what I said because? It's the small businesses that tend to worry about whether it's legal to fire someone, what they need to do, etc. Larger businesses tend to have more clearly written rules and policies, will simply make it more definite about what their disciplinary policies are, and what their procedures are for termination. This just makes it easier to terminate the employee without their being approved for benefits.

 

[eerelations]

And that changes what I said because? It's the small businesses that tend to worry about whether it's legal to fire someone, what they need to do, etc. Larger businesses tend to have more clearly written rules and policies, will simply make it more definite about what their disciplinary policies are, and what their procedures are for termination. This just makes it easier to terminate the employee without their being approved for benefits.

Plus Bali Hai's stats are suspect (i.e., wrong).

 

[Bali Hai]

Plus Bali Hai's stats are suspect (i.e., wrong).

Really? Try firing a long time employee that works for a company that is PR sensitive. If it's as easy as you say, let us know the protocol. First PROVE that they are drinking on the job.

 

[cbg]

Bali, it is clear that you know even less about employment law than you do about family law. No one has to prove a thing. Go Google Employment at Will and then go bother someone else. Maybe Real Estate doesn't know you yet and will let you play in their sandbox.

 

[cbg]

Post a link to the law that says an employee can't be fired for suspicion of drinking on the job.

Put your money where your mouth is, or shut up.

 

[Bali Hai]

Post a link to the law that says an employee can't be fired for suspicion of drinking on the job.

Put your money where your mouth is, or shut up.

Post a law that says anyone can be fired for anything .

 

[jimnyc]

Post a law that says anyone can be fired for anything and I'll show you drowning in your own stupidity.

I believe anyone can be fired for anything - so long as there is no law against it, and there is no contract in place dictating terms of employment. There doesn't need to be a law in order to fire someone, but there DOES need to be a law in order for it to be illegal to fire someone. I think therefore it's up to you to post what was illegal or could be illegal by simply firing someone, or that they need some sort of proof. 'At will employment' pretty much explains that in detail. Not only can they fire you for suspicion, they can fire you because you wore Reebok instead of **** if they choose to.

 

[commentator]

Number of people I have seen fired=hundreds, thousands. Number of people I have seen who have successfully sued the employer after being fired, been reinstated, received a settlement, etc., = maybe 15-20, total in 32 years. Maybe 40% who filed were approved for unemployment after being fired. As is common knowledge in the business of taking unemployment claims, "no problem employee can resist progressive discipline." It is part of the whole HR process. Getting the best employees and getting rid of the hiring mistakes is a daily part of the process. "PR sensitive" means bad publicity, I suppose. If a large company announced the number of firings they made weekly, or if an employee tried to make it newsworthy that they were fired from a company, there would be no room for other types of news in the media.