Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Off duty employee caught drinking

my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Operations » Ground Level » Off duty employee caught drinking (Page 2)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3

Author

Topic: Off duty employee caught drinking

Chris Slycord
Film God

Posts: 2986
From: 청주시, 경북도, South Korea
Registered: Mar 2007

posted 11-10-2007 05:32 PM

quote: Aaron Mehocic
The guard may mean that, technically speaking, if the employer caught them engaged in underage drinking and DID NOT fire them the employer was at the very minimum encouraging improper conduct.

In terms of a spectrum, there's a lot of stuff in between "doing nothing" and firing.

| IP: Logged

Frank Angel
Film God

Posts: 5305
From: Brooklyn NY USA
Registered: Dec 1999

posted 11-11-2007 06:29 AM

I am with Jack and Louis on this. "Zero Tolerance," while the term sounds strong and no-nonsense-law-and-order-ish (politicians invented it and love to throw it around), in many cases, as Jack points out, it merely ties your hands, forcing you into actions that many not be productive or beneficial to you in a given situation. ZT only makes sense if at some point in time, management had specifically, intelligently, with wisdom and forethought, decided that this or that particular action, under ANY circumstances, would be reason for dismissal, and that there could never be mitigating reasons why the actions would be acceptable, such as threatening another worker or patron, or brandishing a weapon, etc.

But then, as Louis rightly says, that list of ZT actions and the consequence for those actions must then be spelled out and published. There can be no doubt in anyone's mind, both employee and employer, of the list and the consequences. The idea of having employees sign such a list of ZT infractions is imperative. If you intend there to be serious consequence for an employee transgressing the list, then you seriously need to make it clear what will happen if they do.

You can't just assume people know the level of severity this or that action as perceived by management unless it has been clearly so stated. And as mentioned, these are teenagers. Things need to be made clear and specific; you can't assume that "everyone knows" you can't drink on your free time. Maybe they did, maybe they didn't -- they did if management had at some point made that very clear. If management hadn't made it clear, then they don't get to ratchet up the seriousness at the time of the infraction.

Other than the specific Zero Tolerance actions, there are going to be a whole host of other actions of lesser severity and importance which nevertheless management will certainly not want their employees to engage in, and although these need to be enforced as well, it doesn't make good managerial sense to take away the discretionary ability from managers on how to deal with infractions. Being able to assess employees' actions on a flexible, case-by-case basis is what good management is all about.

| IP: Logged

Chris Slycord
Film God

Posts: 2986
From: 청주시, 경북도, South Korea
Registered: Mar 2007

posted 11-11-2007 09:37 AM

quote: Frank Angel
you can't assume that "everyone knows" you can't drink on your free time.

Except that everyone DOES know that teenagers aren't allowed to drink at all (it being illegal and all).

But I agree with you on the rest of what you said.

| IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001

posted 11-11-2007 11:56 AM

Any company with a drug testing policy in place -or a basic "if we catch you doing something you're fired" sort of rule- should have the employee sign an agreement to show he is fully aware of the policy.

When we made our random drug testing policy a company-wide policy including office employees and fabricators in the metal shops everyone had to read and sign an agreement. A couple of my co-workers did smoke pot on a recreational basis, but with that policy in place they had to quit. The threat of being piss-tested or having blood drawn at random is a powerful deterrent.

quote: Mike Blakesley
People make mistakes. Many theatre employees are young kids who are still finding their way in life.

I can agree with that regarding movie theater employees. It really sucks when a decent counter employee gets fired for even more stupid policies, such as forgetting to upsell drinks and snacks to a customer and that customer turns out to be a checker. Such acts can put a movie theater into a bind of being short-handed. Job turnover rates are already high enough as it is.

However, in environments where heavy/dangerous equipment is in use, the drug policy just absolutely has to be more harsh. What if an accident happens and a young employee turns out to be high or positive for some substance when it happened? Lawyers, law enforcement people and other regulators are not going to be interested at all in any excuses like, "the kid was young, impulsive and just trying to find his way in life." An incident like that could put the business out of business and have 20 some odd people tossed out of their jobs.

| IP: Logged

Patrick de Groot
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 161
From: Sprang-Capelle, Netherlands
Registered: Apr 2001

posted 11-11-2007 11:56 AM

I think a warning should be all... Or where they very drunk and misbehaving? Don't think so. The employer isn't reponsible for what they do in their free time. What the employer should pay attention to is if they function properly during working hours. Legally I think that the employer doesn't even have the right to fire them in this case.
Btw 18 years? A perfectly legal age to drink a beer in The Netherlands (it's officially 16).

| IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001

posted 11-11-2007 12:00 PM

Since the United States has over 70% of the world's attorney's it's a no-brainer for many companies to have written drug testing policies in place. You never know what's going to get you sued.

| IP: Logged

Shane Cooper
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 232
From: Little Rock, Arkansas
Registered: Jun 2004

posted 11-11-2007 02:01 PM

For me it is not a matter of "a good kid who made a mistake". It also isn't an issue of being off duty or on the clock. The decision to bring beer into a theater ilegally shows a disrespect for their employer. One of the most common complaints from young people is that they are being disrespected, etc. That "respect" has to go both ways.

| IP: Logged

Donna Sylvester
Film Handler

Posts: 33
From: Burney, CA, USA
Registered: Jan 2001

posted 11-11-2007 07:07 PM

I fired one of my employees several years ago for the same thing. My employees are all told, when hired, that they must obey all the theatre rules of conduct when they come in to watch a movie. As my employees, they are representatives of the theatre while in the theatre, whether they are on or off duty. They are told they must set the example for their friends. So, at least for me, if I had let it go, that would have been tacitly implying that I don't really care if my customers bring alcoholic beverages in and consume them at the theatre. By firing the employee, it sent a clear message to my other employees.

| IP: Logged

Ramin Hashemi
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 129
From: Houston TX
Registered: Sep 2004

posted 11-12-2007 11:13 AM

Thanks for all the input.

I should have mentioned, that we do have the policy in writing, and I personally go through this policy specifically with every employee. Also, one of the employees was caught drinking and getting sick from it during a preview a few months back. The staff decided to handle it by warnings and "lets handle it ourselves" method. The top person at the time is no-longer with us of course. I was not told of this till months later when it was too late to do anything about it.

I was a bit on the fence between a 2 week suspension and termination, but both our manager and the guy who is head of security at the high school (he is our security guy and the one who caught the girls) felt strongly about termination.

I guess most things are not as clear cut as one might think.

thanks again

Ramin

| IP: Logged

Jack Ondracek
Film God

Posts: 2348
From: Port Orchard, WA, USA
Registered: Oct 2002

posted 11-12-2007 11:32 AM

quote: Patrick de Groot
Legally I think that the employer doesn't even have the right to fire them in this case.

I think that's true in some countries, but generally not so in the US. Washington is an "at will" state, meaning the employer may hire, fire and schedule an employee as he sees fit. On the other hand, the employee may walk off the job with no notice, should he feel like it, and we have to be prepared to deal with the possibility. Of course, there's probably not much chance he'll have a job to come back to. Union and contract rules can effect the above, but generally not at the entry level that most theatres work at. (Note... This doesn't apply to California, which is a separate country. Their employment rules are found nowhere else in the world!).

It may be a bit hard-nosed, but having come from a generation that was somewhat more strict about respecting authority and the wisdom of elders, I don't tend to start my new staff as if they have to be taught everything about general life basics.

By the time an individual is 16 or so, he/she should already know that habitual tardiness, theft, drinking, drug use, disrespect and general slovenliness is either wrong or illegal. I shouldn't have to assume that everyone who starts with me has a totally empty head, whether or not it may sometimes seem that way.

On the other hand, you do have kids (and some adults) who continue to bring weapons to school. Does anyone really believe there's a person out there who doesn't know the consequences of this? Seems like there will always be someone who will test the rules.

Sorry, but nobody outside of my family is so valuable that I feel my practices must always start with warnings. That is an option I reserve for my elective use. For the employee, being fired can be a learning experience in itself. The process of looking for another job can teach someone a lot about how to handle the next gig.

Is it really that draconian out here? No, of course not. We just keep a relatively simple rule set, which we try to apply fairly evenly to our customers and staff. That makes it generally fun and safe for large numbers to be here and minimizes the time we have to spend with individual issues. If I had a 200-seat single screen and 3 employees, maybe I'd look at things a bit differently... who knows?

BTW... I thought Donna put it very well in her post.

| IP: Logged

Blaine Young
Master Film Handler

Posts: 477
From: Kirkland, WA, USA
Registered: Sep 2006

posted 11-12-2007 01:28 PM

I've been going back and forth on this issue. There are a number of things that sway the issue back and forth, and change the dynamics of the issue.

For example, if this was a public showing and there were paying customers in the auditorium, it's pretty clear the course chosen was correct.

Where it becomes a bit more grey for me is if this is a private screening (an inspection screening, for example) and the employees are off-duty and not the responsible party for the screening (the projectionist), and of legal drinking age. Do the same rules apply?

| IP: Logged

Chris Slycord
Film God

Posts: 2986
From: 청주시, 경북도, South Korea
Registered: Mar 2007

posted 11-12-2007 01:57 PM

Being in an at-will state has nothing to do with this situation. If a person breaks a written policy, they can be fired.

| IP: Logged

Floyd Justin Newton
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 559
From: Phoenix, Arizona, USA
Registered: Jun 2002

posted 11-12-2007 04:36 PM

Alcohol has caused more strife between man since time began. Lets just do away with it and 'on-with-the-show!'
[thumbsup]

| IP: Logged

Frank Dubrois
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 896
From: Cleveland, OH
Registered: Mar 2005

posted 11-13-2007 01:39 AM

quote: Patrick de Groot
I think a warning should be all... Or where they very drunk and misbehaving?

Drunk or VERY drunk? What would the difference be? Their teenagers. They don't even have to be drunk, just drinking and their busted. Even if these employees were of legal drinking age, they should be fired.

People can have bad judgement like saying the wrong thing at the wrong time to the wrong person, and then theres drinking at your place of employment (which with most theaters don't even allow alcohol on the premises). One of these indiscretions deserves a warning, the other deserves termination. If you can't tell which deserves which.....management might not be your calling.

As for the security guard giving out any kind of legal advice, ignore him. Get your legal advice from the real police or a lawyer. "...but the security guard said..." would simply get laughed out of court.

| IP: Logged

Patrick de Groot
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 161
From: Sprang-Capelle, Netherlands
Registered: Apr 2001

posted 11-13-2007 02:50 AM

quote: Frank Dubrois
Even if these employees were of legal drinking age, they should be fired.

?? So your saying that if an employer of legal drinking age drinks a beer in his/her free time at your cinema he/she is fired? [beer]

There is nothing wrong with drinking a beer while watching a movie. At least here. Of course things would be different if no alcoholic drinks are allowed in the cinema.

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3

Printer-friendly view of this topic

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.