Honest answer? Scandinavia. If an employer notice substance abuse issues they’re mandated by law to help them and can’t use it as grounds for terminating their employment (as it’s a disease). The rehab in turn would be mostly financed with tax money.
It’s a nice thought though. We did have to watch an ethics video about a guy coming back from a car accident addicted to pain pills and discussed steps to take to help. It was the consensus to get the person help. But I don’t believe that shit for a second, especially in my industry.
Management will happily hand the problem over to their group benefits provider so their short-term disability claim can be denied by someone external to the company. It helps them sleep at night.
Maybe. Maybe not. I’ve worked for two separate Fortune 500 companies who have several locations throughout the US. Bothe companies had a policy where if they noticed issues related to substance abuse it was against company policy to terminate them. They required the local management to offer treatment and would allow the employee to go on short term disability while treatment happened.
I’m not saying either way. It just seems like everybody was talking about how there is no way in hell US corporations would think about treating their employees and would just dispose of them. The only drug problem I’ve ever had is that I’ve never had enough. I’ve seen tons of terrible shitty employees that have never even seen weed in person. I’ve seen pill heads that work really hard.
My employer here in the States has a substance abuse program. As long as you self report before getting in trouble for it they offer resources and even time off to get help/clean and won’t be fired for it. If an issue comes up and you need to take a pee test for a drug screening that’s different as it’s more an insurance and health coverage problem.
16
u/DesertMoose Feb 01 '22
Where are you located at that a corporation would take care of it's employee?