Drug and alcohol abuse in the workplace is a worldwide problem as it impacts on the company efficiency and cost effectiveness. Companies have prioritized the need to find ways of managing and reducing intoxication in the workplace. In South Africa such processes have to occur within the confines of a constitutional right of fair labour practices and other prescriptive labour legislation. An employee has a constitutional obligation to give faithful and diligent service to the employer. Intoxication contradicts this obligation and may pose a security risk in the workplace. It will be incumbent of an employer to prove that the employee was drunk at the relevant time or was affected by liquor or narcotic substance. Suspicion regarding abuse of alcohol and drugs without proper evidence to support such claims will not satisfy the substantive fairness requirements. When it comes to proving that the employee is indeed under the influence of alcohol and drugs in the workplace, many questions arise. Is it necessary for the employer always to conduct a breathalyzer test or even a blood or urine test? Is it sufficient for the employer to lead other evidence like smelled of alcohol, unsteadiness on his feet and slurred speech? The author will attempt to answer these questions. An employee who consumes alcohol or drugs in the workplace can either be disciplined for misconduct or incapacity. The dividing line between misconduct and incapacity is not always clear. The author suggests various ways of dealing with alcohol and drug-related misconduct and incapacity depending on the facts of each case. Disciplinary sanctions should, as far as possible, be designed to discourage repeated alcohol and drug abuse. Different standards of conduct may be expected of different employees given the nature of their work and the degree of their responsibility. Fair discipline requires a fair procedure, fair disciplinary rules and a fair graduated system of punishment. Termination for incapacity occurs if the employee no longer has the capacity work (on account of his alcohol and drug dependence). Termination for misconduct occurs if the employee consistently acts as though he is not bound by the rules of conduct within the employer‟s establishment on account of his repeated alcohol or drug abuse. Discipline should be progressive in nature, intended to remedy rather than merely punish wrongful behaviour. Case law suggests that employers treat alcohol and drug dependence, the same as other illnesses, with sympathy, understanding and compassion. The author suggests that alcohol and drug abuse in the workplace must be dealt with on a case to case basis
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:netd.ac.za/oai:union.ndltd.org:nmmu/vital:10248 |
| Date | January 2012 |
| Creators | Swartz, Johnny Dick |
| Publisher | Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University, Faculty of Law |
| Source Sets | South African National ETD Portal |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Thesis, Masters, LLM |
| Format | 80 leaves, pdf |
| Rights | Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University |
Page generated in 0.0016 seconds