Posted By tony rawlinson I have an employee who before christmas went to the doctor feeling really ill generally. He was told it was down to sever binge drinking and told to calm it down. blood tests were taken and the results came through between christmas and new year. The surgery made him an appointment that he did not attend and now he now catagorically refuses to remake or reattend. When the doctor called him he told my employee that there was a serious problem with his liver function. Any advice? I want to be sympathetic and help but also don't want to be taken advantage of. Where do i stand legally? can i force him to go? Regard t

Posted By Gordon Thelwell From a strictly rational point of view i would highlight to the employee that he has a statutory duty not to endanger his or other employees health and safety caused by his acts or omissions. As you know alchohol is a drug, if this person was taking cocaine or 'H', would you tolerate this in the same way? It is comendable that you are offering this person assistance and support, but this must have its limits. I feel that a clear line needs to be drawn in the sand for this person with a view to highlighting the distinct choices he/she has. Very much like laying down boundries to guide their choices and the consequences (both positive and negative) respectively. It would be interesting to know what the job function he/she carries out. i.e. vicarious laibility. Good luck.

Posted By Gilly Margrave Doesn't really help if you're already in this situation but it could act as a catalyst to thinking about a Drug and Alcohol Policy. I don't know if yours is a unionised workplace or not but even if it isn't you may find some useful pointers in this information sheet from the public service union UNISON. It also contains a link to the relevant bit of the HSE site. http://www.unison.org.uk/acrobat/B976.pdf Gilly

Posted By Laurie Beware the DDA! An impaired liver function might just be classified as a disability, and you might be running the risk of discrimination. I'm serious Laurie

Posted By John Murgatroyd From an employment law angle, the Access to Medical Reports Act 1988 is relevant in the context of recruitment, health screening during employment, time off for medical reasons and dismissal for medical reasons. The Act itself, sometimes wrongly called the "Access to Medical Records Act 1988", is quite short - only 10 sections in all. This Act covers medical records held by employers as well as records held by doctors. More accurately it gives an individual the right to have access "to any medical report relating to the individual which is to be, or has been, supplied by a medical practitioner for employment purposes or insurance purposes" (Access to Medical Reports Act 1988 s.1).. It also gives individuals the right to refuse consent for any medical report (as defined) to be supplied by a doctor to an employer or insurer, plus other rights.