When talking to employers about their current challenges, chances are good that you hear about their difficulty finding and retaining good employees. Part of the challenge is attributed to the unemployment rate, while other factors include a lean, employable workforce and the increased prevalence of positive drug tests.
Not being able to find workers and the threat of losing seasoned employees because of substance misuse has forced many employers to consider or reevaluate their willingness to offer a second chance to employees who test positive.
The value of second chance drug-free workplace programs
First, not all policy violations, including testing positive, mean the employee meets the assessment criteria for having the disease of addiction. For those employees, a violation and its consequences can serve as a “wake-up call,” essentially intervening in the progression of their use and preventing the onset of Substance Use Disorder.
For an employee who is assessed by a treatment professional and found to have addiction, research shows that having a job actually improves the chances of staying in recovery. Employment provides a sense of purpose and contribution, a support system and structure. What’s more, a recovery-supportive work environment can help to prevent a setback.
However, it is not just the employee who benefits from a second chance program. Employers who offer second chances benefit, too. Research shows that employees in recovery have lower turnover, absenteeism and health care costs than the general workforce. On top of that, terminating an employee instead of offering assistance can be expensive – costing an employer an estimated 25 – 200 percent of an employee’s annual compensation to replace them – not to mention the loss of all of that knowledge and experience.
In addition, the skill-set required to maintain life-long recovery includes many skills that are valued by many employers – for example, determination, sharp problem-solving and coping skills, grit, resilience and commitment. And think about the gratitude employees have for a second chance and the motivation they can bring back onto the job with them.
Considerations
If an employer is considering implementing a second chance approach for the first time, it’s important to know what relevant laws and authorities may require that employer to do in these situations. For example,
- Some professions and industries may have rules and codes of ethics around addiction, so if you have an employee with a professional license or credential, proactively research those authorities,
- Employers regulated by the Department of Transportation must follow certain steps if an employee confesses a problem, tests positive for a prohibited substance, or is offered a “second chance,” and
- The Americans with Disabilities Act protects people with addiction if they are currently in treatment, have successfully completed treatment, and/or are in recovery. The law also protects an employee with a current alcohol problem IF they are able to perform functions and tasks essential to their job and adhere to HR policies. However, employees currently using illicit drugs – including the illegal use of prescriptions – are not provided protection under the ADA.
It’s prudent to seek legal counsel to address all issues of accommodation, especially as they relate to your policy and practices related to handling medical conditions.
There are other things to consider as well. Some employers reading this are thinking about issues around safety, public image and productivity – which certainly enter the discussion. But often at the heart of that discussion is the debate about whether treatment works, whether someone can be forced to get help, and if offering a second chance is even worth it.
“What are the chances he’ll be successful?”
“What if she’s not ready to get help?”
“Can he be trusted not to use again?”
These questions, focused solely on the employee and his or her readiness to accept and follow through with assistance, are certainly worthy of consideration. Modern theories around addiction treatment, for example, describe stages a person needs to move through to embrace and maintain long-term behavior change. It is certainly a process, and not everyone who fails a drug test and is offered a second chance will be ready to change.
However, whether offering a second chance is successful depends on more than employee readiness, namely
- the readiness of the employer, particularly in relation to their drug-free workplace policy/program, and
- the readiness of the assistance provider to work with the business community.
Employer readiness
Simply having a solid, comprehensive drug-free workplace can motivate an employee who’s engaged in the harmful use of substances to move toward change. A positive drug test, for example, can serve to break through an employee’s denial of a problem – which is one of the “must-do” accomplishments in the initial stage of change.
When an employee does test positive, however, there are other things an employer can do to increase the likelihood that offering a second chance will be worth it.
- Understanding addiction as a medical condition
Because addiction is so stigmatized in our culture, the thought of hiring or retaining a person with a history of alcohol or other drug issues may bubble up feelings of concern and apprehension. But thanks to scientific advancements, such as brain imaging technology, we now know addiction is a brain disease that is preventable and treatable – similar to other behavior-related, chronic diseases like heart disease and Type II diabetes.
According to the American Society of Addition Medicine (ASAM), addiction is a treatable, chronic medical disease involving complex interactions among brain circuits, genetics, the environment, and an individual’s life experiences. The National Institute of Drug Abuse reports that addiction can be effectively treated with recurrence rates “no higher than those for other chronic illnesses such as diabetes, asthma and hypertension.”
Understanding addiction as a medical condition and working to reduce or eliminate this stigma requires undoing decades of mental programming, which can be tough. It takes exposure to education, research and dialogue to truly accept and adopt this new understanding of addiction as a medical issue.
For those interested in reading more on this, we recommend the online publication Drugs, Brains, and Behavior: The Science of Addiction.
- Having a pre-existing relationship with an employer-friendly assistance provider
If an employer offers a second chance following a positive test or other violation, they need to know where to send that employee for an alcohol/drug assessment and related services. The provider could be one from a list of local community treatment programs; a special program offered via the company’s insurance or through a union; or it could be a formal Employee Assistance Program (EAP) offered as part of the employer’s benefits package.
Regardless of which resource an employer decides to work with, they need to ensure the provider is a high-quality resource with appropriately licensed professionals who can assess and diagnose addiction. The employer should also ask the provider if they can guarantee an acceptable turn-around time for an assessment. Another factor to consider when choosing a provider is how accessible it will be to employees, including location, schedule, cost, and its cultural appropriateness.
- Administering a detailed assistance agreement with the policy-offending employee
An employer’s DFWP policy/program should include a formal assistance agreement that is signed by both the employer and the employee who is offered a second chance in lieu of termination. This agreement outlines details of the referral and lists the expectations.
The agreement needs to outline operational issues such as the process for permitting communication between the employer and provider, follow-up supports including testing, and consequences for failure to comply with the agreement.
Having this type of agreement, in writing, not only helps keep the employee on track, but it also provides structure to the employer in terms of managing the referral and return-to-work process.
Provider readiness
It is important for employers to have access to cost-affordable employee assistance services to support their second chance agreements. For many employers, that means leaning into the system of local community behavioral health agencies. While businesses can become aware of agencies in their area that could provide assessment and treatment services to their employees, there are two main barriers that can be present in those local agencies when it comes to an employer-mandated referral:
- lack of financial assistance for the employee (making the services inaccessible)
- minimal case management services for the employer
The primary payor sources for most community behavioral health agencies are Medicaid and subsidies from local alcohol/drug funding boards. Neither of these avenues for financial subsidy are typically available to a working adult (because of their income level), which means the worker is responsible for 100 percent of the fees. While some community behavioral health agencies are in the position to accept private insurance reimbursements, employees still find themselves responsible for 100 percent of the fees due to their high deductible plans.
At the same time, many community behavioral health agencies are not equipped or funded to provide case management services to employers who mandatorily refer an employee for assessment/treatment. These necessary activities include cost-manageable assessments, proactive and business-appropriate follow-up reports, return-to-duty recommendations and referrals to other needed services.
These barriers in the funded system of community behavioral health agencies can be surmounted. However, employers – and by extension our economy – would benefit from targeted advocacy and systems change to make our systems of care more employee and employer-friendly.
Due to these current barriers, employers may find it preferable to contract with an EAP resource. EAPs help manage the referral process for the employer, including researching benefits, providing status reports and return-to-duty recommendations.
And let’s face it, alcohol and other drug issues aren’t the only problems impacting the workplace. A traditional EAP is an employer-sponsored program designed to address problems related to mental health, relationships or finances, and other workplace-impacting issues. Their role is to serve both the employer and the employee.
Typically, employees (and their family members) have access to a contracted number of sessions — per problem per year – with a counselor. During these sessions, the EAP will conduct an assessment, provide brief counseling, and/or refer the employee to additional services if they have a problem that requires more in-depth treatment or services. EAPs have been found to be a cost-effective addition to employee benefits packages, which not only support an employer’s current workforce, but add to the attractiveness of the job for new applicants.
In summary
A successful second chance policy and program has far-reaching implications for both the employee and the employer. For the employee, research indicates that employer-supported and monitored treatment yields better sustained recovery rates than treatment initiated at the request of friends and family members.
And for the employer, a second chance policy and program can be a wise and financially-sound business investment. The cost of replacing an employee range from 25-200 percent of their annual salary. And these costs don’t include losses in company knowledge, continuity and productivity. In terms of absenteeism, an employee in recovery from addition actually misses less work than the general workforce, and there are also savings in terms of healthcare costs. On top of that, the loyalty of an employee who has been supported by their employer to get healthy is immeasurable.
DISCLAIMER: This article is designed to provide accurate information regarding the subject matter covered. It is provided with the understanding that those involved in the publication are not engaged in rendering legal counsel. If legal advice is required, the services of a competent professional should be sought.