Rank: Forum user 
|
Updating our Accident policy and would like to introduce Alcohol Testing for any individuals involved in Accidents. I know from experience the Rail industry have a similar procedure. We have the Home Office approved testing kit that is similar to that the Police use on Drink Drivers. Would like any feedback on the legal implications on introducing such a measure and on the experience of forum members in a similar situation. Thanks in advance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
I would advise you take a look at INDG240.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Our company do drug and alcohol testing after an accident, but we are trained in the use of the equipment every 2 years, and we have a drug and alcohol policy, we also do random testing as well, which doesn't go down to well, but the insurers are happy, we also test new employees on induction when they start with the company, we have a lot of dangerous machinery, so we are classed as high risk in the manufacturing industry, I dont have a problem with testing employees, its all down to peoples lifestyles, and what they do outside of work,
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
You don't need to train staff to do the testing, there are several reputable companies that will do employment screening, random testing and 'for cause' [accident etc] testing.
The main thing is to get the workforce on side, and if your company is 'unionised', I don't believe that you would be able to implement a policy without the union 'buying in' to it
Look at what the railways do - Google 'railway group standards' for the website and do a search on 'drugs alcohol' or similar. Bur remember that the railways have a legal obligation on D&A, your industry [probably] doesn't
PM me if there's anything else I can help with
Alan
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
We have due cause testing, which is done at the works medical center by a trained nurse, samples are given etc and is all recorded with a procedure in place and this procedure is also part of the companies policy. The unions are all on board with it and it is a good system.We check for both drugs and alcohol after any incident or if there is a concern that the individual might be under the influence of either , this can be assessed if there is a smell of drink or abnormal behavior of the individual .
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Alan's right - dinnit try to enforce it otherwise yarl get nee where!!! It's also worth reminding staff that the test can be 'negative in a positive way' if ya naar warra mean like?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Originally Posted by: NEE'  Alan's right - dinnit try to enforce it otherwise yarl get nee where!!! It's also worth reminding staff that the test can be 'negative in a positive way' if ya naar warra mean like?
This is worse than a post full of acronyms!!!!! ;-))
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
I think the key thing to take into account is how you manage the 'chain of custody' in the event that D&A screening is carried out.
There's plenty going on with the Martin Lawrence case at the moment in relation to how evidence is handled and although this is in relation to a CPS case the same lessons should be considered when gathering this type of evidence for safety related investigations.
As mentioned before I'd have to say that the best method has got to be through the use of a reputable external company for handling this. In the event that someone is found to have been under the influence whilst on duty there can be no question that the evidence was collected and handled correctly and the results are right. With that kind of back up if a dismissal did go to tribuneral there would be little chance of the ruling going against the employer due to a failure of process in the handling of the evidence.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Another thing to consider is that for a D&A policy to work you need to have the fall back of sanctions that can be taken should the employee refuse to provide a sample or if the sample returns a "fail" i.e. termination of employment.
If you don't currently have a D&A policy, it's possible employee employment contracts would need to be redrafted and resigned including a clause that failure to provide a sample or a failed test is considered gross misconduct. This then allows sanctions to be taken against employees if the situation should ever arise (and act as a deterrent!).
This will depend on what employment contractors your organisation has currently, we found ours didn't have a suitable clause.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.