Breath Tests

[Mark Rosebury]

We employ people to drive our vehicles and I was wondering on where we stand on giving our drivers random breath tests? (I know many companies do this).
Can we issue the test ourselves? And if we do and somebody fails can we then act upon this or would we need special training to issue a breath test? Would we need to inform the police if somebody failed so they could come and obtain an evidential breath test, as the person had intent to drive?
Any help or comments would be greatly appreciated.

Mark

 

[vvaannmmaann]

Let Google be your friend.
http://www.tssa.org.uk/article-47.php3?id_article=1008

Lots more stuff there.Type 'Breath testing in the workplace'

 

[KDMINX]

I assume that there is very little ongoing cost associated with breath testing (ie the machine costs money but the cost of the disposable tubes is negligible).

So I would suggest that if you are going to bring in breath testing, you make it a normal part of clocking on / collecting paperwork etc. Just another part of the process.

I strongly suggest that you do not use it “randomly” as this causes problems with employees feeling singled out or victimised.

 

[Mark Rosebury]

The plan was to have it "random" so that our staff would not know when it was but to avoid people feeling victimised we would test everybody.

 

[J_A_M_E_S]

If there are too many people to test everyone every time - I've previously worked at a place where bags were randomly searched at the end of each shift - but the way this was done was to use a machine on the wall which randomly selected the required number of people to search (each member of staff pressed the button on the way out - when it buzzed, they were searched).

This could be set to average 1 in 10, 1 in 5, or whatever.

This took away the possibility of it becoming personal . . .

 

[Jigsaw CCS]

It all sounds very '1984' to me, but then I expect it is required when you're talking about something as dangerous as drink driving. If you do go ahead with the tests, my advice would be give everyone 30 days notice and let them know exactly how the system will work when it is introduced, this will avoid people feeling victimised and give them time to think it over. Also make sure they understand the consequences - 'You will be fired without notice and police will be informed' - this sort of warning should scare anyone off drinking on the job in the first place.

It should act as a good deterrent whichever way you handle it, but seek legal advice and read up on things like the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974, just so you're sure you're acting appropriately as an employer.

 

[vvaannmmaann]

Mark,have a look at this.
This seems to only release keys once you have provided a 'clean' sample of breath!
Maybe your company lawyers could advise as to the possible legal implications of it?
http://live.logisticslink.co.uk/en/..._Ensure_Safety_Obligations_Are_Being_Met.aspx

 

[Jigsaw CCS]

Mark,have a look at this.
This seems to only release keys once you have provided a 'clean' sample of breath!
Maybe your company lawyers could advise as to the possible legal implications of it?

"...a group is studying various nanotechnologies, one of them uses sensors embedded in the steering wheel or gear shift that can measure blood-alcohol levels through the skin -- much as an exercise machine can measure a heart rate." - Maybe a bit too far in the future to think about now!

 

[craiga1971]

We employ people to drive our vehicles and I was wondering on where we stand on giving our drivers random breath tests? (I know many companies do this).
Can we issue the test ourselves? And if we do and somebody fails can we then act upon this or would we need special training to issue a breath test? Would we need to inform the police if somebody failed so they could come and obtain an evidential breath test, as the person had intent to drive?
Any help or comments would be greatly appreciated.

Mark

Have you got a specific problem you need to solve?

Craig

 

[KDMINX]

The plan was to have it "random" so that our staff would not know when it was but to avoid people feeling victimised we would test everybody.

I think that would work. I'd also make staff aware that you will at sometime in the next month be doing random breath tests then do them regularly, at least once a month. That way staff have time to modify behaviour...

In the past I have worked for companies that do “random” drugs tests. These tests were NEVER viewed as random, never seemed to target “high risk” employees (ie those well known to take drugs) instead they targeted employees management didn’t like and were looking to get rid of!

 

[Mark Rosebury]

We do not have a specific problem that we need to address that we know of; our company currently has 5-6 employees that drive our vehicles including myself. We are looking at a contract that would see our driver numbers increase to about 30. We would be operating vehicles 24/7 and so we thought it might be a good idea to have something in place. If we do go down the route of breath test then all drivers would have the opportunity to request a breath test e.g. if they had had a drink the night before.
It only takes one person to have an accident or be found to be over the drink drive limit and we would lose the contract and our reputation would suffer, plus we thought it could give us an extra selling point in the future.

ps we are getting legal advice on the matter and are also going to consult with staff before we make our final d[FONT='Calibri','sans-serif']ecision.[/FONT]