Open All Hours

Alcohol already costs businesses an estimated 29 million lost days per year either through unexpected absences or incompetence while at work. 54 percent of administrative and secretarial staff believe that 24-hour licensing will make the situation worse - by contrast only 47 percent of managers think so. For workers aged 18-25 the percentage is even higher with 55 percent agreeing that 24-hour drinking is bad for the workplace. The results are particularly significant as, according to government research, it is this age-group which is most likely to indulge in binge drinking. A tiny 6 percent of those asked feel that productivity will be increased by 24-hour licensing.

Already ten million working days are lost annually through alcohol excess when staff are too hung over to face work and absenteeism is likely to increase. According to the survey 16 percent of administrative and secretarial staff have taken a day off sick with a hangover. Hungover employees who do turn up for work are not only less productive but can also be abusive, incompetent and/or violent as well as physically sick.

Part of the problem is a sea change in attitudes towards drinking: more than a third (35 percent) of administrative and secretarial workers - higher than the total average for all sectors of 31 percent - feel it's now more acceptable to go to work with a hangover than it was three years ago. Surprisingly it's women who cite the biggest change in attitudes to alcohol, with 35 percent feeling it's more acceptable to turn up hungover compared with 26 percent of men. Almost one in three workers go to work up to five days a year with a hangover, and half of all employees are hungover at work at least once per year.

Drinking v dismissal
Some businesses already make it a condition of employment for their staff not to drink or be affected by alcohol while at work. The rail industry, for example, prohibits any employee to report for work while under the influence of alcohol or consume alcohol on duty - only soft drinks are served at staff parties. The industry policy goes further than that specified by the Transport and Works Act 1992, which only applies to staff directly affecting the operation of rail transport and therefore public safety. To avoid discrimination, industry regulations apply equally to all staff connected with the rail industry including those in administrative capacities. The mandate is enforced by random testing of those in safety-critical jobs plus the testing of anyone involved in any incident or exhibiting unusual behaviour. Refusing or failing a test is a sackable offence.

Alcohol excess already costs British businesses an estimated ?2.8 billion per year. In an effort to reduce the massive bill it would not be surprising if employees in other industry sectors start facing the same conditions of service to those imposed in the rail industry.

Licence to swill?
The Irish government has already experienced the effects of liberalising alcohol consumption and is re-imposing limitations on the licensed trade as a result. The Irish government's Commission on Licensing commented on the undesirable effects of the measures contained in the UK Licensing Act, but the UK government dismissed the evidence as inapplicable and claims that the law will reduce alcohol misuse. Martin Warnes, Manager of reed.co.uk comments: 'our research appears to question the government hope that 24-hour licences in pubs will lead to a more relaxed, Continental-style attitude towards drinking outside working hours. Young people, the age group most likely to take advantage of any relaxation, are the most concerned that it would affect productivity.'

Current licensing laws have changed little since they were imposed in 1915 to prevent munitions workers turning up drunk and harming the war effort. As Martin Warnes says: 'perhaps the government should bear this in mind before trying to introduce a European drinking culture through legal changes.'