Wrongful Termination?

[teddyb]

I worked for AFW for four years and all employee's are subject to random UA/BA tests. On August 29th I was given one of these test. My UA came back negative, my BA came back positive for alcohol. Every night after work I do have a drink or two but have never drank before or during work. I was terminated for having alcohol in my system and was informed by testing specialist that alcohol can stay in my system for 48 to 72 hours if I drink everyday. I have been advised by several people that if I was terminated because of an alcohol or drug problem I should have been offered treatment. Is this correct? And if it is, do I have any recourse?

 

[disagreeable]

You need to look at your union contract if you are in a union. It will outline your drug alcohol procedures and rights. You likely need to file a grievance ASAP to protect your rights. Otherwise, you are likely out of luck.

 

[esteele]

First, what is "AFW"?

Second, as the above responder indicated, if you are covered by a union contract, your local apparently should file or should have filed a grievance on your behalf. Unless you have a position which reasonably requires a complete absence of alcohol from an employee's system, it appears at first blush unreasonable to terminate a unionized worker because he has insignificant, trace amounts in his system based on his off-hours usage.

If, however, you were an "employee at-will" you may not have any basis for challenging your discharge.

 

[teddyb]

Not in a union, but wanting to know if any one knows of a law that requires an employer to offer counseling for alcoholism before the employer discharges because this is a disease. Someone V Someone in any law book..... Please help if you can.

 

[army judge]

Not in a union, but wanting to know if any one knows of a law that requires an employer to offer counseling for alcoholism before the employer discharges because this is a disease. Someone V Someone in any law book..... Please help if you can.

Well, you're out of aces on this one, OP.


Now, had you disclosed to your employer that you had this problem, prior to it being discovered; you might have had an actionable case.


But, back to answering your current question, no; an employer has no legal duty to excuse your behavior.

You can always make a couple of appointments with labor attorneys in your area.

The initial consultations are free.

That way you can present all information you possess and ask many questions related to your case.

If I were you, and wasn't convinced that there was no there there, that's the route I'd pursue!!!

 

[cbg]

There is no such Federal law and Colorado has no such law either.

 

[army judge]

There is no such Federal law and Colorado has no such law either.

True, but had the OP disclosed his condition, prior to the test; he/she might have been able to prevail upon the sympathy, pity, empathy, or good will of the employer.

Alas, it is not to be after the fact!

 

[esteele]

First, if the OP was an employee at-will, his private sector employer could lawfully fire him for trace amounts of alcohol in his system. I do not think there is a statute or a precedent anywhere in the United States which forecloses a private sector employer from discharging an at-will employee for off-hours drinking. Similarly, such a company can fire an at-will employee for off-hours smoking or for any other reason management conjures up (as long as said reason does not contravene an applicable law or contract).

Second, again, what is AFW, OP? The answer could make a difference.