Builders say No to drink and drugs testing

BUILDING firms cannot be expected randomly to test their staff for drink and drugs and they won’t foot the bill for such checks, the Construction Industry Federation (CIF) has warned.

As the national builders’ holidays continue this week, the CIF says, while everyone wants to improve site safety, save lives and prevent accidents, employers can’t be the ones forced to carry the can.

The new Safety, Health and Welfare at Work Bill allows the Health and Safety Authority the right to test workers for drug or alcohol use. It also provides for on-the-spot fines ranging from €100 to €1,000 as well as a “name and shame” mechanism for those found guilty of serious infractions. The legislation also features penalties of up to €3 million and/or imprisonment for two years for those indicted in the Circuit Court.

Stop-work orders may be issued in extreme cases of carelessness.

However, the CIF is concerned over how the new laws will be implemented, according to its monthly Construction magazine.

“We welcome the introduction of on-the-spot fines, which for the first time recognises that employees have a safety responsibility for site safety and a sanction must be brought against workers for breaches of that responsibility. We look forward to clarification on how that will operate,” said CIF safety services executive Dermot Carey.

Mr Carey is concerned that the onus will be put on employers to test for alcohol and drug use.

“It is the employee who brings this hazard to the workplace, therefore, the onus should be on the employee, if there is suspicion, to provide proof of fitness to work. Employers cannot be expected to carry out random checks on employees to establish if they have excessive drugs or alcohol in their system. If the Government decides to introduce this system, then they must provide the Health and Safety Authority with the resources required to enforce this law.”

The CIF is concerned about the proposal to publish names of those issued with prohibition notices.

“Adverse publicity along with the difficulty such companies have with obtaining insurance after being issued with such notices may be too much punishment and too severe and could drive companies out of business,” said Mr Carey.

“Companies need all the assistance necessary to ensure they have proper safety procedures in place. This can be done without putting them out of business.”

It is in no one’s interests to put companies at risk, said Martin Lynch, principal officer in the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment, the body responsible for health and safety.

“Our aim is to increase the level of responsibility to the top of the pyramid, so the person who procures (the project) is also responsible for safety. Up to now, it tended to be the construction company. We are going to the top now, saying the man who pays must make safety an issue.”