It’s not the drink and drugs tests per se that worry me, it’s as always the potential abuse of power that concerns me. We all know the type of character who’d willingly volunteer to be a tester (Christ, this forum alone throws up a few no marks who’d kill for the opportunity). So for that reason alone I’m against them.
The Co I work for have this policy and indeed have had for as long as I’ve worked there. In fairness though not a single driver has ever been tested. A few managers have (which I’m all in favour of ) and they also used to test the warehouse bods a lot. I say used to, but taking into account that the majority of the warehouse workers are sub 25 years old they found that they were dismissing about 30% of the workforce every time they had a purge! That was quietly dropped.
The only time I’ve been drink and drugs tested was when I was pimped out to Iceland at Warrington for a few weeks. In fairness again I was pre warned that I’d be tested and given the option not to go there if the thought upset me. As I’d been pre warned I wasn’t bothered at all about the test, and indeed on the drive up there I made sure I kept my intake down to two cans of Stella in anticipation.
I can’t blame companies for alcohol testing seen as a stobart driver (walkers contract) failed a breathalyser after falling out of his wagon at our DC. Blowing 2 or 3 times over
the maoster:
It’s not the drink and drugs tests per se that worry me, it’s as always the potential abuse of power that concerns me. We all know the type of character who’d willingly volunteer to be a tester (Christ, this forum alone throws up a few no marks who’d kill for the opportunity). So for that reason alone I’m against them.
The Co I work for have this policy and indeed have had for as long as I’ve worked there. In fairness though not a single driver has ever been tested. A few managers have (which I’m all in favour of ) and they also used to test the warehouse bods a lot. I say used to, but taking into account that the majority of the warehouse workers are sub 25 years old they found that they were dismissing about 30% of the workforce every time they had a purge! That was quietly dropped.
The only time I’ve been drink and drugs tested was when I was pimped out to Iceland at Warrington for a few weeks. In fairness again I was pre warned that I’d be tested and given the option not to go there if the thought upset me. As I’d been pre warned I wasn’t bothered at all about the test, and indeed on the drive up there I made sure I kept my intake down to two cans of Stella in anticipation.
.
I hadn’t noticed any difference, a large majority still seem vacant.
If companies are testing due to an accident or because of suspicion then I don’t really have an issue. I would take issue with random testing, because of how difficult it would be to prove it was truly random, and not the result of am office bod with a vendetta.
I would be very surprised if most companies don’t currently have something written into contracts already allowing them to test in the event of accident or suspicion. They would have to be seen to have something in place, even purely as an arse-covering exercise, to say they have policies in place to protect themselves in the event of an employee being caught under the influence, although it remains to be seen how these policies would actually stand up in the real world.
Imagine a driver causing an accident and police/solicitors etc going to the company and asking if anyone suspected the driver of being over the limit, and why they were not tested, only to be given the response of ‘we couldn’t assess him, as if we’re in the office when he was in the yard!’. Can’t imagine that would go down well…
Odd days:
I was lead to believe it was 12 weeks notice too. Then it’s agree , leave, or strike, but as there is very few strong unions now most people agree what ever industry they are in.
And that is why this job is like it is now.
Compare those sorry arsed types ‘‘who agree’’ with our Grandfathers who fought tooth and nail (and won) for workers rights and terms,… the same types who handed them all back and lost them.
My memory has gone a little fuzzy, but just remind me again how the fiasco over your employer deducting damage from your pay packet panned out in the end?
Odd days:
I was lead to believe it was 12 weeks notice too. Then it’s agree , leave, or strike, but as there is very few strong unions now most people agree what ever industry they are in.
If it was a change to a contract or terms and conditions of employment then there would need to be a notice period, defined in the contract and based on your length of service. With a union agreement in place or collective bargaining this would be 12 weeks across the board.
But introducing drugs and alcohol testing isn’t a change to your contract or terms and conditions of employment, it’s a change of a company policy.
Depending on the company refusal would probably lead to dismissal.
You don’t have a choice it’s up there with all the important stuff, and as you have said many times about drivers just following the lead this is something you should follow without question
It’s not something you can really make a stand on but you can insist that everyone is treated the same top to bottom, now that’s a stand you could make about it
Odd days:
I was lead to believe it was 12 weeks notice too. Then it’s agree , leave, or strike, but as there is very few strong unions now most people agree what ever industry they are in.
And that is why this job is like it is now.
Compare those sorry arsed types ‘‘who agree’’ with our Grandfathers who fought tooth and nail (and won) for workers rights and terms,… the same types who handed them all back and lost them.
My memory has gone a little fuzzy, but just remind me again how the fiasco over your employer deducting damage from your pay packet panned out in the end?
Class.
Thinks its the same old, if you dont like it theres the door attitude. So be a good little yes man and bend over and take it.
If my manager, supervisor and other orifice staff were in front of me in the queue, then I’d gladly provide a sample. But if I’m simply being selected because of my role in the company (ie driver), then I’d be as awkward as I could get away with.
As far as I’m aware, we’d only get tested in the event of a collision or if there was just cause.
Odd days:
I was lead to believe it was 12 weeks notice too. Then it’s agree , leave, or strike, but as there is very few strong unions now most people agree what ever industry they are in.
And that is why this job is like it is now.
Compare those sorry arsed types ‘‘who agree’’ with our Grandfathers who fought tooth and nail (and won) for workers rights and terms,… the same types who handed them all back and lost them.
My memory has gone a little fuzzy, but just remind me again how the fiasco over your employer deducting damage from your pay packet panned out in the end?
Not just fuzzy pal, but playing tricks on you …wtf are you on about exactly?
Odd days:
I was lead to believe it was 12 weeks notice too. Then it’s agree , leave, or strike, but as there is very few strong unions now most people agree what ever industry they are in.
And that is why this job is like it is now.
Compare those sorry arsed types ‘‘who agree’’ with our Grandfathers who fought tooth and nail (and won) for workers rights and terms,… the same types who handed them all back and lost them.
My memory has gone a little fuzzy, but just remind me again how the fiasco over your employer deducting damage from your pay packet panned out in the end?
Class.
Thinks its the same old, if you dont like it theres the door attitude. So be a good little yes man and bend over and take it.
‘Class’ eh? Self congratulation maybe?
Hmmm (stroking beard)…Now which one of em is my old T/net namesake mate…, or is it both.
I should have been a detective, my talents are wasted being a trucking God.
robroy:
My other point is…Can they actually make you do it?
I don’t mean put your arm up your back, or two heavies sit on you , I mean can they make you in terms of you have the right to refuse, and is it legal in that context to not let you go out in the truck if you do refuse, although there is no REAL suspicion of drinking, just fulfilling their quota on random testing.
There needs to be some sort of test case on this for clarification, I know some d/heads do turn up for work in varying degrees of unfitness, but it’s just another one size fits all policy as Juddian would say, decent drivers treated the same as the firm’s dicks.
Still,.as long as drivers are willing just to roll over, they will go on be faced with all types of injustices, humiliation, and unfair treatment…along with the ones who are not willing, …and because of them…
It’s a bit of an awkward to be fair Rob. On the one hand, drink driving is a massive no no but also on that basis has the possibility of being weaponised for harassment of the workforce.
I really don’t think it’s a good look for anyone to organise or engage in a strike over being breathalysed before driving a truck, that’s the kind of thing that would surely play into the hands of certain management, the clash would be over enforcement and policy.
I personally wouldn’t have an issue with the test being done but I think it really needs a very clear policy agreed by all, even that is going to be a challenge. Imagine trying to quota the tests, ■■■■■■■■ offenders would simply see that as almost a timetable to gamble on drinking.
To me the only real way would be on a truly random basis, something, as stupid as it sounds, like a simple button to push when you get the keys at the desk, green then no test and red means you give a sample.
As far as I’m aware it’s 90 days to change terms so in that 90 days maybe those who drink regularly can gets of there own breathalysers and work out if they have an issue, let’s face it, everyone has different tolerances.
Don’t forget though, this is only really going to work for shift drivers. Trampers and night out men are another issue, just look at that AIM driver with the multiple fatalities, no office policy and random test was going to pick him up as he was asleep and drunk at the wheel, I’ll bet there are a few drivers out there who’ll sink 4 cans on a reduce and think they’re ok because they had some kip and a bit of food…
Some good points made there mate.
I didn’t say I was going to go on a one man strike crusade , I just wanted to know how I stood by law, and what options are open.
As Maoster says, it’s the certain type of ■■■■ that would volunteer to do it,.also the manner in which it would be implemented would be an issue…
For example, an officious attitude, talking down to you with authority going to his head, and treating you like some 12 yr old f/whit would be a good reason to tell him to go and ram it right up his arse, whereas an approach such as… ‘‘Look Rob, I know you are going to pass this, but as a formality would you be willing to take it, I’m doing this only because I’ve been asked’’ and tbh I more than likely would.
Attitude is a ‘reap what you sow’ situation in all aspects of life.
Odd days:
I was lead to believe it was 12 weeks notice too. Then it’s agree , leave, or strike, but as there is very few strong unions now most people agree what ever industry they are in.
And that is why this job is like it is now.
Compare those sorry arsed types ‘‘who agree’’ with our Grandfathers who fought tooth and nail (and won) for workers rights and terms,… the same types who handed them all back and lost them.
My memory has gone a little fuzzy, but just remind me again how the fiasco over your employer deducting damage from your pay packet panned out in the end?
Not just fuzzy pal, but playing tricks on you …wtf are you on about exactly?
Wasn’t it you that had a thread on here a while back about your employer deducting damage and you weren’t going to stand for it?
HobNobRoy:
Class because RTK or any other firm introduce this sort of thing and you guys just accept it like the cameras.
Let us know how you get on after refusing to do it then we can use that as a test case if you decide to take it all the way.
Or are you the bend over yes man that you despise ?
It seems Stobarts and all big firms are implementing all that type of crap, the minority kick off but the majority just pave the way shouting them down.
But anyway (Jeez I nearly got into intelligent conversation with you there wtf was I thinking ) don’t worry Roy my son, (or is it Rob) I’ll make sure you are the first to know.
Yep, I bend over that much and take it, that I now have an arse like a funnel, you’ve got me banged to rights.
It’s almost like you KNOW ME. …(hmmm again strokey beard etc etc)
HobNobRoy:
Class because RTK or any other firm introduce this sort of thing and you guys just accept it like the cameras.
Let us know how you get on after refusing to do it then we can use that as a test case if you decide to take it all the way.
Or are you the bend over yes man that you despise ?
There is a big difference between a company bringing in a system to breathalyse drivers (random, or if suspected of being under the influence) and actually breathalysing every driver coming through the door.
Like the driver facong cameras, they will be used when necessary, not blanket wide. There is no need to breathalyse most drivers. It’s the ones reeking of booze, it’s the ones know to get ■■■■■■ regularly, maybe even the ones saying they ‘only have a pint with a meal’… (no offence Rob ). Afterall, you only have that drivers word for it.
And most of us ‘of a certain age’ will remember the bad old days… be honest . We’ve woken up in strange beds, we’ve lived to tell the tales, grown up, but not everybody has, and to be honest, there is a bigger problem than the old days, when drivers might have a bit of a woolly head. These days, there seems to be a bigger number of drivers who drink before, or even during their shift…
Breathalyse, cameras, tachographs, speed limiters, log books …
Every generation has their ‘final straw’, but in they end, you’re not going to stop it.
R420:
Wasn’t it you that had a thread on here a while back about your employer deducting damage and you weren’t going to stand for it?
In a word …No.
Sorry, my mistake. I have found the old thread and it was “another driver” who’d had damage costs deducted. But you had refused to sign the form, however your continuation to perform your role was legally defined to be acceptance of the new terms & conditions. As you were so vehemently against this, I assume then that rather than becoming a ‘yes’ man by rolling over and accepting it, you have parted company and are now working for a different employer with more appealing T & Cs ?
) and they also used to test the warehouse bods a lot. I say used to, but taking into account that the majority of the warehouse workers are sub 25 years old they found that they were dismissing about 30% of the workforce every time they had a purge! That was quietly dropped.
wtf was I thinking