This case involved a dispute regarding the introduction of random intoxication testing for staff members. The employer company had proposed the introduction for staff employed prior to the 1st January 2013, as there was a contractual obligation for staff who were employed after that date, but the group of unions said that no further provision was necessary as staff could already be tested with due cause.

The employer claimed that, following a review of the company's policy on alcohol and substance abuse in 2012, the workplace was considered a safety critical-workplace environment and that the policy is designed to mitigate against the risk of one being under the influence at work and to also support those who have a substance abuse problem. The employer argued that a person affected by the use of intoxicants may endanger others and that random intoxicant testing is becoming the cornerstone of health and safety in many companies. They also argued that it was a condition to have random intoxicant testing included in awarding contracts to third parties for works within Dublin Port.

The employer submitted that since the introduction of random intoxicant testing for staff employed since the 1st January 2013 the test has picked up two incidences and with the assistance of their professional health and safety representative provided information on the impact of intoxicant abuse on performance and behaviours at work.

The Group of Unions submitted that as all pre-January 2013 staff are covered by a Policy on Alcoholism (Substance Abuse), which was introduced in June 2000, it was not necessary for the employer to introduce a new random intoxicant testing policy. The Group of Unions indicated they were not familiar with the 2003 Policy on Alcohol and Substance Abuse allegedly in place but nonetheless submitted that although the Port was a safety-critical area it was their view that it did not constitute a requirement for random intoxicant testing.

The Court noted that there was no dispute in relation to the necessity of having an appropriate Alcohol and Substance Abuse Policy in the employment. However, the Court felt that the impact of random intoxicant testing may affect other rights that employees have and therefore cannot be treated lightly.

The Court stated that the introduction of such testing must be necessary, justified and proportionate with regard to operational issues identified by the employer. The Court was not satisfied that the employer identified a necessity for the introduction of random intoxicant testing but recommended that the parties agree that the 2003 Policy would be the appropriate policy to address related issues going forward.
https://www.workplacerelations.ie/en/Cases/2018/September/LCR21788.html