Addiction in the workplace: What employers and employees need to understand

Discussions regarding addiction as a workplace problem during the last decade have undergone some considerable changes. What used to be regarded as a manifestation of personal moral flawfulness and therefore resulted in instant firing started to be treated as a real illness affecting an employee regardless of their economic status and sphere of activity.

Not all the companies changed their attitudes to this matter in this way; however, the companies taking the new path are finding out about its advantages. The benefits are revealed not only for the employees but also for the employers.

Addiction is not the marginal issue. Various studies prove that the significant part of the workforce struggles with the issue of substance abuse – either the employees themselves or their relatives and families. Thus, the myth about drug addicts being unemployed should be dispelled.

Various effects can be observed and they can be measured from various sides. Firstly, there is an increase in the number of absences. This aspect is even less evident than the previous one because of the rise in presenteeism (when an employee is present physically but inefficiently because of addiction). Secondly, the number of occupational injuries rises. Thirdly, there is a fall in productivity and decision-making skills. Fourthly, medical expenses grow. Fifthly, there is a higher turnover of the personnel. According to NIDA, the total cost of productivity loss caused by substance abuse in the USA comes to $80 billion per year. This argument is of financial nature.

The best policies to address addictions in workplaces are those that involve clear policies combined with support. This is not a contradictory thing, and this is what many people misunderstand. Setting clear policies on behavior and performance is not about punishing employees suffering from addictions. There is a way to set high standards and ensure that the people get access to treatment.

One of the least used tools in the field is Employee Assistance Programs (EAPs). Most companies have them, yet there are very few people making use of them due to lack of knowledge about the existence of EAPs, lack of confidence in the confidentiality provided, or inability to see their situation as severe enough to need assistance from such an office. A good EAP can provide confidential counseling, mental health assistance, counseling on addiction, and referrals to treatment services free of charge.

When there is available support in the form of specialized programs, employees who have trouble dealing with their addictions will fare much better if they can take medical leave without the risk of losing their job. FMLA law covers employees in some cases, while under ADA alcohol and drug addiction that is treated is considered a disability in some cases.

Let us be clear: Some kinds of work contribute to addiction. With high stakes, high pressure, irregular schedule and clients' entertainment, which is often related to alcohol and drugs, people have more problems with substance abuse than others. Nevertheless, for those who suffer from addiction, this kind of work is the source of stress and causes substance abuse.

It is necessary to say once again that addiction has multiple sources, including family background and individual predisposition to disorders. Still, the environment is the factor that influences the process of deciding of a risky employee what to choose: Continue working or to turn to addiction.

Thus, the one who understands that he/she suffers from addiction has a dilemma: Should he/she disclose the problem or keep silence about it? Will the employer support him/her in this situation or take advantage of the information and use it in the negative sense? What will be the impact of the disclosure on the employee's career and on his/her attempt to solve the problem?

All these questions are legitimate and sometimes well-grounded too. Therefore, the issue of culture is as important as that of policy.

Even with the best EAP policy in the world, the company can have such culture that will make sure that nobody will use services of this program since everybody knows that "needing help" means "ending your career". The culture is shaped by practices that include modeling by management, rewarding, approach to disclosing problems with mental illnesses and addictions.

The companies that understand the importance of changing the culture regarding the mental illnesses and substance use do not only display the phone number of the EAP, but they provide special training for the managers about how to talk to the employees having certain problems; have influential people sharing their experiences or experiences of people they know; provide possibility to take medical leave without stigma; encourage and support the recovery.

When an employee returns to work after going through addiction treatment, the manner of this transition becomes crucial. Without appropriate support, an employee can easily go back to old habits and resume substance abuse. Nevertheless, with proper support that includes modification of the schedule, continuation of the outpatient therapy and regular consultations with supportive supervisor, the possibility of staying sober will increase significantly.

Once again, the difference between punitive and supportive approaches becomes obvious. An employee, who returns to work in the situation where the same performance standards are imposed upon him/her without any regard to difficulties experienced, will have less chance of staying sober than another one who enjoys the appropriate support of the employer.

Addiction recovery requires continuous efforts. The workplace can become either a barrier to making them or, conversely, a supporter. The companies that realize it invest in creation of the conditions, which will make the latter happen.

The workplace of the future, and sometimes even of today in many cases, views the mental health and sobriety of its employees as the essential part of organizational culture rather than an issue to be managed. The evidence of this approach becomes more and more convincing and impressive: The employees who are adequately supported in their wellbeing become more productive and loyal to their organizations.

This article was written in cooperation with Tom White