My company (Quarrying, Construction, Demolition, Transport) is currently reviewing our drug & alcohol policy as part of our occupational health surveillance, we have looked at our competitors stated alcohol limits which are generally either 0.17mg or 0.35mg (the drink drive limit).
The question I am asking is what is the industries take on "acceptable limits" and what if any limits are in place out there?
In addition what are your experiences on this topic?

You asked if there are any limits out there - I also note the word "transport" in your introduction.

If the word transport includes railways or ships then there are statutory limits - see Railways and Transport Safety Act 2003

Hi there

My company works in the entertainment sector and whilst we do not carry out testing ourselves I am aware of other companies who randomly test anyone working on their sites. Earls Court Olympia has a limit of 17.5 mg / litre breath which is half the legal driving limit. They have a stringent drugs and alcohol policy in place following a couple of high profile deaths involving falls from height where alcohol and drugs were found to be contributory factors.

If your testing people to verify alcohol levels I think there could be probelms with having a complete zero tolerance - I'm not sure...

hi,
I strongly believe a zero tolerance policy is the way to go forward, ( dont get me wrong I enjoy a drink as much as any person) simply because the effects of D&A differ from person to person and from situation to situation, I think that when you start messing with accepted levels you are on the wrong track , I do also strongly believe as another member mentioned that it should not be a dismissal tool , as you are only displacing the problem for some other company to deal with , I believe that once you are confronted with a member of staff who suffers from D&A issues you have a moral duty of care ( not to be confused with legal duty of care). and in most cases they are solvable and awarding. without acting like mother theresa

Having been involved for many years in both Alcohol and Drugs testing as well as being involved in setting up the policy for a large company, a number of points.
It is impossible to have a zero policy fro alcohol as the human body produces substances in breath which can give a reading even when the person is a non drinker. Plenty of law to prove this. Current breath machines are accurate to a +/- amount, that is why you are not prosecuted if you blow 38ug alcohol in breath even though the limit is 35ug. The law even allows you the option of blood if reading =< 50ug. Best to set a limit, 12ug is a good one.
Another point a reading of 50ug is obtained what do you do. Send them home. If they leave and drive who is responsible if they have an accident. You were aware they presented a clear danger on the road but sent them home anyway.
Drugs are easier. A basic screening test and a hair sample if positive to identify which drugs.
A rule that refusal or failure to take a test when asked treated as a positive test.

Oh dear - and I thought we as a profession were trying to avoid being seen as the ban it brigade.....

Well done "bridge to safety" - impairment is the concern. To all those who 'assume' that drug use = impairment, I can only refer you (yet again!!!!!) to the fact that international research for e.g. HSE and the Australian Government has established no link between recreational use of alcohol and drugs and workplace accidents, whilst for many these tests are considered to have significant human rights issues - to the extent that they (the tests) are banned in at least one EU nation, Finland.

See HSE Research Report 193 "The scale and impact of illegal drug use by workers" and "Work-Related Alcohol and Drug Use - A Fit for Work Issue", published by the Ozzie Govt. See also papers from the nursing and midwifery council of GB, the BMA and others....

Government stats indicate that nearly one third of workers under 30 have taken drugs in the last 12 months. We have to assume that a significant proportion of e.g. any major employer's workforce will also have done, unless not gambling with the regimes in safety critical sectors such as rail.

Given the length of time that abuse can be detected this could have a severe negative impact on recruitment, let alone retention.

So - to those of you who seem intent on ban it and sack em. Do the policea favour and do all their testing for illegal drugs ('cos sure as eggs is eggs you ain't gonna be testing for prescribed tranquilisers.... which (in my experience) have a very significant effect on functional capability and error - prone performance).

In UK PLC - we generally trust our employees to tell us (and DVLA) if their eyesight is good enough to drive a car (but many don't - so there are multiple deaths every year which could be attributed to deficient eyesight). But we don't trust 'em to tell us (and the police!) if they've just returned (within the past thirty days) from Amsterdam where it is perfectly legal to indluge in some substances which are illegal over here. WHY????? I have to ask those of you who seem determined to impose a 'zero tolerance' policy - WHY??? where is your evidence of impairment? I fear that we have our priorities very seriously skewed and that the evangelists who campaign tirelessly with prejudice but without evidence are winning.

Time to get below the parapet methinks.

Steve

Have just read steves ashton's comments and can only say have you ever been present when someone is told that thier husband, brother or sister or son has been killed because the person responsible or even the person who has died was under the influence of alcohol or drugs? I think not as it is a very heart breaking thing to have to do. Put simple drugs and alcohol do not mix with undertaking any task taht can put safety at risk its as simple as that.

Sorry to hear that you have had the very hard job of telling someone that a loved one is dead especially because that resulted from alcohol, done it too often myself and seen the aftermath. We should not take a view of this in a wider mix of other causes such as tiredness, they all have an impact upon safety, but the original posting was about drugs and alcohol and that is what I responded to. If you want a discussion about tiredness or even overwork or poor training I would be happy to join in but this topic was about D&A so I respopnded to that particular topic.