UKWA FOR WEB - United Kingdom Warehousing Association

Legal 17
sidered that, even if Mr Sinclair had not
been dismissed, he would still not have
embarked on a course of treatment with
sufficient energy to stop the disciplinary proceedings
altogether, and he would, therefore,
have been dismissed 4 weeks later. It
further reduced his compensatory award by
25 per cent on the basis that he had contributed
towards his dismissal.
Mr Sinclair appealed against the decision
to limit his loss of earnings to 4 weeks and
the imposition of a 25 per cent reduction.
The Council appealed against the finding of
unfair dismissal and the decision to limit the
contributory fault reduction to 25 per cent,
arguing it should have been higher.
The EAT dismissed Mr Sinclair’s appeal.
It was, however, more sympathetic to the
Council’s position. While it did not agree
with the Council that the appeal hearing
cured the procedural defects of the original
decision to dismiss (i.e. that Mr Sinclair had
not been provided with the alcohol policy in
sufficient time and had not clearly understood
what needed to be done to suspend
the disciplinary action), it thought that the
Tribunal was wrong to take the view that
those aspects of Mr Sinclair’s conduct which
were attributable to alcoholism should not
lead to reductions in the amount of his
compensation.
This decision makes it clear that, despite
some people taking the view that alcoholism
is an illness, that for employment law purposes,
employees who are alcoholics need not
be treated as if they are sick if their conduct is
‘blameworthy or culpable’.
Mr Sinclair’s dismissal was nevertheless
found to be unfair on procedural grounds.
The Council had not followed its own alcohol
policy and had not even given the policy
to the employee or his managers. This left
Mr Sinclair in some doubt as to whether he
was in fact doing all that was required of
him.
In light of Sinclair, employers should
ensure that they have a clear and comprehensive
alcohol policy in place that is
applied consistently and distributed to all
staff. The policy should clearly set out its
purpose, to whom it applies, and the rules
covering what is and what is not allowed.
Consultation with employees on the aim,
content and scope of the policy is vital in
order to increase workplace awareness of
the issue.
The CIPD’s recent research identifies the
reasons for employers to implement an
alcohol policy being the need to safeguard
the well-being of the workforce, to ensure
the safety of the public, to safeguard the
organisation from unfair dismissal claims,
and to maintain the external image and
reputation of the organisation. It found,
however, that only 22 per cent of employers
actually train employees generally on the
organisation’s policies and procedures
although this is the key method to increasing
knowledge and understanding in the
workplace.
In light of the Sinclair case, employees
also need to be made aware of the consequences
of non-compliance, including the
circumstances in which the disciplinary or
capability procedure will be invoked. As
well as regular training for managerial staff
to promote awareness and support the
implementation of the policy and relevant
“As part of an alcohol policy, employers should
consider whether alcohol testing should be included.
The situations in which testing will be used should
be clearly identified and the consequences of failure
to pass a test should be outlined”
procedures, managers should also be
encouraged to promote an environment in
which employees feel comfortable raising
concerns and certain that such issues will be
dealt with professionally and in confidence.
As part of the alcohol policy, employers
should also consider whether alcohol
testing should be included. Such testing
is on the increase and if this is to
be used in the policy, a specific term
should also be included in the employees’
contracts of employment and consent
should be obtained on each occasion
that employees are tested. The situations in
which testing will be used should be clearly
identified and the consequences of failure
to pass a test should be outlined.
Overall, an awareness of the issue of
alcoholism and a firm and consistent, yet
compassionate approach is required to
enable employers to effectively manage
alcoholism in the workplace.
For more information on this, or any other
employment issue, contact Helen Watson on
01244 405565.
www.ukwa.org.uk June 2008