Sarah Chilton: How should HR deal with a case of addiction in the workplace?

-

 what are the legal issues when dealing with addiction in the workplace?

Addiction in the workplace can present significant challenges for employers and specific instances of drug or alcohol use can present health and safety risks, and serious conduct issues – all of which will fall to HR to navigate. And the path is littered with potential pitfalls.

Use of drugs or alcohol is frequently related to other health issues, both physical and mental, which is a further reason the issue needs to be dealt with sensitively by employers.

In the UK, employees who are disabled under the Equality Act 2010 (“the Act”), are protected from discrimination and harassment. A disability is defined as a physical or mental impairment which has a substantial and long-term adverse effect on someone’s ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities. Addiction is expressly excluded from the definition of disability, unless it arose as a result of taking medically prescribed drugs or other medical treatment. This exclusion might make employers think that they can disregard disability discrimination when dealing with employees with an addiction, but it is not that straightforward.

HRreview Logo

Get our essential weekday HR news and updates.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Keep up with the latest in HR...
This field is hidden when viewing the form
This field is hidden when viewing the form
Optin_date
This field is hidden when viewing the form

 

Addiction may cause a condition which is itself a disability, or, may present because of an underlying disability. The courts will examine closely the reason for the treatment of the employee and whether it was because of the underlying disability, or the addiction.

Addiction frequently appears as an underlying cause in circumstances of misconduct, absenteeism and poor performance.

If there is any suggestion that drinking, for example, is as a result of stress, anxiety or depression, or there was an adverse effect due to medication, the employer should consider obtaining a medical report to understand the medical position before proceeding with any disciplinary sanction.

Even where there is no disability present, if the employee suffers from a substance addiction and that has contributed to their behaviour, employers should consider carefully their options before moving to dismiss. The ACAS guide to discipline and grievances at work suggests that consideration be given to measures to help those employees suffering from drug or alcohol abuse and failing to, at least, consider what help could be put in place as an alternative to a disciplinary sanction, may affect the reasonableness of any sanction.

Even in the seemingly straightforward situation of an employee presenting for work drunk or under the influence of drugs, dismissal may not be a fair response. Whilst being drunk or under the influence of drugs is likely to constitute misconduct, or gross misconduct justifying dismissal, an employer can’t automatically assume that there will be grounds for termination.

In McElroy v Cambridgeshire the Employment Tribunal held that the summary dismissal of a healthcare assistant for coming to work smelling of alcohol was unfair and not the actions of a reasonable employer in the absence of evidence. But, in another case, where the employee was found in possession of cannabis at work, dismissal was reasonable – Asda v Coughlan. The fact that the substance is legal or illegal is likely to be a relevant factor for the employer to take into account in determining sanction.

It may also be appropriate in some circumstances to suspend disciplinary action where alcohol or drugs have been a factor, on the condition that the employee follows a suitable course of action, such as rehabilitation.

What is clear is that just because drugs or alcohol are involved, it doesn’t negate the need for thorough investigation, just like any case of alleged misconduct or poor performance.

The Act provides protection for employees from discrimination arising from disability. For example, an employee is underperforming and has a substance abuse problem which has resulted in the employee suffering from severe depression. The employer should not simply discipline or dismiss the employee for their poor performance, even if that performance is below the standard expected of them in their role. If the employer charges forward with action against the employee, and it transpires that the cause of the underperformance is their depression, then the employer may have committed an act of disability discrimination.

This will not mean that someone with a substance abuse issue who suffers from depression will always be so protected – the act (prompting the potential disciplinary action) itself must happen because of something arising in consequence of the disability.

Employers could consider offering the employee time off to seek medical help. If doing this, it is important to consider how that employee will return to work. Advice should be taken from the employee’s treating physician. There may be need for a phased return – especially when the addiction arose due to something related to work, extreme stress for example and, in such circumstances, consideration must be given to what else might be done for the employee, within reason, to prevent the situation reoccurring.

Employers should consider including relevant policies in their staff handbook. For example, appropriately worded disciplinary policies, a health and safety policy and a drug and alcohol misuse policy, including any drug testing provisions which apply.

Employers should also consider the type of support they may wish to offer those suffering with addiction issues, including time off, medical treatment and support packages.

Conclusion

Although addiction is not a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010, which protects people with disabilities from discrimination in the workplace, this doesn’t mean that dismissing someone with an addiction will always fall outside the Act. A dismissal could be still be considered discriminatory if there is an underlying or related issue amounting to a disability and reasonable steps were not taken either to establish this, or to provide adequate support for the employee.

 

Interested in inclusion in the workplace? we recommend the Diversity and Inclusion for HR Professionals training day.

Sarah Chilton is an employment and partnership lawyer with CM Murray LLP, and is speaking about “Addiction in the workplace: corporate risk, human frailty and legal arguments” at iCAAD London 2019. https://www.icaad.com/icaad-london-2019

Latest news

Lucy Standing: Older workers are back in the centre of the hiring debate – ready to lead the response?

For HR leaders, the argument is simple: the people being filtered out of your hiring process are not past their best.

One in 10 women quit work after pregnancy loss, report finds

Research suggests inconsistent workplace support following pregnancy loss and maternity leave is contributing to resignations and poorer mental wellbeing.

Fear of becoming obsolete grips workers as AI reshapes careers

More than two in five workers worry their skills could become outdated as AI reshapes hiring demands and increases pressure to keep learning.

Ford rehires 350 engineers after AI fails to deliver

Carmaker says veteran engineers have helped improve quality, mentor younger staff and retrain AI systems after automated checks fell short.
- Advertisement -

Low harassment reporting may hide workplace misconduct, employers warned

Low workplace harassment reporting rates may reflect a lack of trust in reporting systems rather than an absence of misconduct, new research suggests.

Jennifer Liston-Smith joins Halo Workplace Nurseries board

HRreview columnist Jennifer Liston-Smith has joined Halo Workplace Nurseries as chief purpose officer to help develop its workplace nursery compliance platform.

Must read

Isaac Getz: The French paradox: How France is ‘liberating’ its employees

Within a liberated company, employees enjoy freedom to take any action that they—not their supervisors or procedures —decide are the best for the company’s vision. Professor Isaac Getz discusses freedom and leadership at work.

Nitzan Yudan: Are a few more drinks at the Christmas party the right Employee Experience?

There has been a lot of talking recently about Employee Experience. But what does it actually mean? With countless possible initiatives and opportunities to invest in, here is a methodical approach to ensure you deliver on what matters most.
- Advertisement -

You might also likeRELATED
Recommended to you