Comments on: Realism

By: Chuck in MI

Chuck in MI — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 16:57:59 +0000

Although the employer may not be able to initiate action, what about OSHA? Isn’t alcoholism encouraging a dangerous work atmosphere? What about if the guy is handling hazardous materials? Would alcoholism be breaking any EPA regulations?

I would imagine certain machine lubricants are classified as “hazardous materials”.

By: CJ

CJ — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 02:35:38 +0000

Medicine is my business, too, and the scenario of a drunk surgeon is terrifying. I agree that there are problems with the law, but I think some protection for alcoholics is important. You made a distinction between recovered/not recovered. I don’t think all people necessarily understand that distinction, and the term “alcoholic” has very negative connotations (and perhaps it should). However, I know some very capable people, both in and out of the medical profession, who carry the label “alcoholic,” but who have been very responsible in treating/managing their disease.

I don’t know what the solution to this problem is, but I think people should be protected from losing their jobs in the situation where someone finds out that they attend AA meetings.

By: Matt

Matt — Mon, 12 Oct 2009 20:57:25 +0000

You overestimate your own value. With that standard, you’d make a great juror!

By: cynic

cynic — Mon, 12 Oct 2009 19:09:47 +0000

I know lawyers hate educated jury members, I am usually disqualified once I mention my profession.

Keep herding your sheep Matthew.

By: Matt

Matt — Sun, 11 Oct 2009 22:31:11 +0000

You have found two. You have no idea at what stage they were dismissed. You know nothing about how much they cost to defend or really much about the facts. It’s entirely possible the judge ruled that the plaintiff had to pay costs. Being a small business owner, I am quite aware of the costs of doing business.

Any system to resolve disputes will have a point where cases are filed. We don’t have the ability to stop filings before they happen. Which seems to be what you want.

Incidentally, substance abuse does not seem to be a disqualifier from practicing medicine, at least to many medical boards.

By: throckmorton

throckmorton — Sun, 11 Oct 2009 22:14:49 +0000

Here is an older case, this one in Florida where an alcoholic was terminated on the basis of being drunk at work. He sued based on the violation of ADA and one.

http://www.jacksonlewis.com/legalupdates/article.cfm?aid=737

These cases are fought one by one. The problem is that the cases always cost money. Many in small business dont have the money.

CJ:

I do believe that an employer should be able to not hire someone who is an alcoholic that is not recovered. The problem is the law does not seperate those that are still incapacitated from their alcohlic use. In my business, medicine, you don’t want to hire a drunk surgeon.

By: Matt

Matt — Sun, 11 Oct 2009 20:43:08 +0000

Throck, your link doesn’t support your original post. I wonder I you read it. And no I am not aware of every suit filed for the simple fact that merely filing a suit does not equate to it being law. It would be a waste of time for me to read every suit filed. I too have to be up to date, but only with actual changes in the law in my practice areas and in the jurisdictions in which I practice.

By: CJ

CJ — Sun, 11 Oct 2009 19:58:39 +0000

Throck, from your source:

“However, an employer can fire or discipline an alcoholic worker for failing to meet work-related performance and behavior standards imposed on all employees — even if the worker fails to meet these standards because of his drinking.”

If an employee is drunk at work, according to the article you cited, that is grounds for firing the employee.

In your original post, it seems as though you think an employer should be able to not hire/fire someone just based on the fact that they are an alcoholic. Being an alcoholic does not mean that someone is unfit for a particular job or that they are going to show up drunk to work. I don’t know, seems like a good law to me…

Now, if you can show me links to laws from the states that you say disallow firing someone for being intoxicated at work, that’s a completely different story.

By: throckmorton

throckmorton — Sun, 11 Oct 2009 18:48:53 +0000

Matt:

Here is an up to date article. (In medicine we have to be up to date)

http://knowledgebase.findlaw.com/kb/2009/Sep/41302.html

I am sure that you are aware and following the case of the Sherrif Deputy that has filed suit for being drunk on duty claiming that he is disabled.

By: Nurse K

Nurse K — Sun, 11 Oct 2009 18:02:46 +0000

My brother is an AA sponsor…one of his sponsees is an alcoholic MD who was fired for being drunk at work (ie seeing patients). He was able to collect unemployment because he was not offered a reprieve from his duties for treatment for his medical condition. Shit you naught.

I actually don’t think you can collect disability for alcoholism anymore, however.