Research paper
Do workplace policies work? An examination of the relationship between alcohol and other drug policies and workers’ substance use

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2015.08.017Get rights and content

Highlights

  • The majority of Australian workplaces have at least one AOD policy in place.

  • The most common policy type is a policy addressing AOD use at work.

  • Some AOD policy types are associated with decreased odds of AOD use.

  • Alcohol/drug testing in isolation is not significantly associated with AOD use.

  • Other substance use behaviours are not associated with AOD policies.

Abstract

Background

There is growing interest in workplace policies as a strategy to prevent or manage alcohol and other drug (AOD) problems. This study is the first to explore the prevalence and impact of AOD policies in Australian workplaces using a nationally representative dataset.

Methods

A secondary analysis of the 2010 National Drug Strategy Household Survey was conducted (n = 13,590). Descriptive analyses explored the prevalence of AOD policies. Multinomial and logistic regression assessed the relationship between policies and health behaviours.

Results

Workplace AOD policies were associated with reduced employee substance use. Having any AOD policy in place was associated with significantly decreased odds of high risk drinking (OR: 0.61). In terms of specific policy types, policies on ‘use’ and ‘use plus assistance’ were associated with significantly decreased odds of high risk drinking (OR: 0.64 and 0.43, respectively). ‘Comprehensive’ policies were associated with significantly decreased odds of drug use (OR: 0.72). AOD policies were not significantly related to absence due to AOD use, attending work under the influence, or usually consuming AOD at work.

Conclusion

These findings provide empirical support for the value and efficacy of policies to reduce alcohol and drug problems. While basic policies on ‘use’ were associated with a reduction in high risk drinking, more comprehensive policies were required to impact drug use. Notably, alcohol/drug testing in isolation does not appear to be related to reduced employee substance use. Scope exists for Australian workplaces to implement effective AOD policies. This could result in considerable benefits for both individuals and workplaces.

Introduction

A health issue gaining prominence in Australia and internationally is the prevalence of employee alcohol and other drug (AOD) use (Frone, 2006, Pidd et al., 2008, Roche et al., 2008). In 2013, approximately 36% of Australian employees consumed alcohol at risky or high risk levels, and 16% had used at least one illicit drug in the past 12 months (Roche, Pidd, & Kostadinov, 2015). Similar patterns were found for the United States, with 14% of employees using illicit drugs and 35% drinking at risky levels (Frone, 2006, Frone, 2008).

Workforce alcohol and other drug use is associated with substantial negative consequences (Drugs and Crime Prevention Committee, 2006), including workplace injuries (Spicer, Miller, & Smith, 2003), missing work, poor quality work, arriving late/leaving early, doing less work, arguing with colleagues (Amick et al., 1999), withdrawal behaviours (Lehman & Simpson, 1992), absenteeism (Bass et al., 1996, Pidd et al., 2006) and presenteeism (de Graff, Tuithof, van Dorsselaer, & ten Have, 2012). It has been estimated that alcohol-related absenteeism alone costs businesses up to $2 billion per year in Australia (Roche et al., in 2015), $4 billion in America, and €9 billion in the European Union (Anderson and Baumberg, 2006, Bouchery et al., 2011).

The workplace provides an important opportunity to prevent, identify and manage health problems among employees, including AOD use. An increasingly common strategy is the implementation of workplace AOD policies (Pidd and Roche, 2006, Pidd and Roche, 2014). These policies seek to curb employees’ substance use and promote a safe and healthy working environment.

Workplace AOD policies may comprise one or more diverse strategies, including written policies prohibiting the use of alcohol or drugs at work; providing counselling and assistance; and alcohol/drug testing. The policies of an organisation are likely to influence perceptions of acceptable employee behaviour, the physical availability of drugs and alcohol in the workplace, and the extent to which colleagues are perceived to use alcohol or drugs at work. These factors are all associated with employee substance use (Ames and Grube, 1999, Ames and Janes, 1992, Bacharach et al., 2002, Biron et al., 2011, Frone, 2009). Workplace policies therefore have potential to prevent and reduce AOD use and related harms among employees.

There are promising indications that workplace AOD policies may be beneficial in reducing employee substance use, and thus prevent the above costs and negative outcomes. For instance, evidence consistently demonstrates that employees are more likely to quit smoking if their workplace has supporting policies or programs in place (e.g. Alexander et al., 2010, Bauer et al., 2005, Kouvonen et al., 2012). However, the relationship between workplace policies and alcohol and illicit drug use has been less thoroughly explored. This is in spite of the growing international interest in, and use of, drug testing (Pidd & Roche, 2014).

In addition, there is little research available on the nature, extent or impact of AOD workplace policy implementation, either in Australia or internationally. A 2004 National Worksite Health Promotion Survey found that the majority of organisations in America prohibited alcohol and drug use (91% and 93%, respectively), but that provision of support for AOD problems was much less common (36%) (Linnan et al., 2008). Australian data from 1996 similarly found a high prevalence of smoking- and alcohol-free workplaces (46% and 77%, respectively) (Richmond, Heather, & Holt, 1996b), and fewer tobacco and alcohol programs (43% and 24%, respectively) (Richmond, Heather, & Holt, 1996a) among the top 600 companies in Australia.

However, there is a paucity of current nationally representative data regarding workplace AOD policies in Australia. Organisations seeking to promote healthier behaviours amongst their employees urgently require up-to-date, accurate, and evidence-based information regarding the nature, extent, and effectiveness of such policies. The current study therefore sought to explore the prevalence and types of AOD policies present within Australian workplaces and industries, and the relationship between AOD policies and substance use behaviours among employees who drink or use drugs.

Section snippets

Dataset

This study involved secondary analyses of the 2010 National Drug Strategy Household Survey (NDSHS). The NDSHS is a national triennial cross-sectional study of awareness, attitudes and behaviour concerning alcohol, tobacco and other drugs amongst Australians aged 12 years and over. The NDSHS utilises a multi-stage stratified sampling technique. Data are weighted by age, gender, and geographical location to provide a nationally representative sample of the total Australian population. The survey

Demographic characteristics

Demographic characteristics of interest were age, sex, gross personal income, marital status, education (completed high school yes/no), rurality and industry. Rurality (major cities/inner regional and outer regional/remote) is a measure of participants’ location at the time of survey completion, based on the Australian Standard Geographical Classification (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2011). Industry of occupation was classified according to the Australian and New Zealand Standard

Analyses

Data were analysed using SPSS version 22. Frequency analyses were conducted with weighted data using SPSS complex samples analysis to account for the sampling design, and explored the distribution of demographic characteristics, health behaviours, and workplace policies, as well as associations between variables. The relationship between five dependent variables (1. alcohol consumption; 2. drug use; 3. absence due to alcohol or drug use; 4. worked under the influence of alcohol or drugs; and 5.

Sample characteristics

The sample comprised 56.2% males and 43.8% females, with an average age of 40.6 years (SE: 0.15). The majority of participants were married (69.3%), had finished high school (62.5%) and resided in major cities (66.9%). Personal income was relatively normally distributed, with the largest proportion of participants (14.1%) earning a gross salary of $1000–$1299 per week. The industry in which the greatest proportion of participants worked was healthcare and social assistance (12.4%), while the

Discussion

Workplace AOD policies represent an important but underutilised opportunity to promote healthy employee behaviour. This study explored the prevalence and impact of AOD policies in Australian workplaces. It is the first study to do so using a nationally representative dataset. A differential effect was found for various types of policies and their impact on either high risk drinking and/or drug use. Having ‘any’ AOD policy in place, or having a policy on ‘use’ or ‘use plus assistance’, was

Limitations

A limitation of the current study is the self-report methodology utilised by the NDSHS. Despite a large overall sample size, the number of participants who reported engaging in some substance use behaviours was quite small. This may be due in part to the socially sensitive nature of the questions and resultant desirability bias. As the policies significantly associated with alcohol consumption (‘use’ and ‘use plus assistance’) were the most common types of policies, it is possible that in a

Conclusions

This study is the first to explore the prevalence of AOD workplace policies in Australia using a nationally representative dataset, and the relationship between policies and substance use behaviours. Results indicate that some workplace AOD policies are negatively associated with high risk alcohol consumption and drug use. There is scope for Australian organisations, and particularly those in industries with high levels of substance use, to implement more effective AOD policies. This could

Conflicts of interest

The authors have no conflict of interest to declare.

References (32)

  • E.E. Bouchery et al.

    Economic costs of excessive alcohol consumption in the U.S., 2006

    American Journal of Preventative Medicine

    (2011)
  • K. Pidd et al.

    How effective is drug testing as a workplace safety strategy? A systematic review of the evidence

    Accident Analysis and Prevention

    (2014)
  • L.A. Alexander et al.

    Occupational status, work-site cessation programs and policies and menthol smoking on quitting behaviors of US smokers

    Addiction

    (2010)
  • G.M. Ames et al.

    Alcohol availability and workplace drinking: Mixed method analyses

    Journal of Studies on Alcohol

    (1999)
  • G.M. Ames et al.

    A cultural approach to conceptualizing alcohol and the workplace

    Health and Research World

    (1992)
  • B. Amick et al.

    Employee drinking practices and work performance

    Journal of Studies on Alcohol

    (1999)
  • P. Anderson et al.

    Alcohol in Europe: A public health perspective

    (2006)
  • Australian Bureau of Statistics

    Australian and New Zealand standard industrial classification (ANZIC)

    (1993)
  • Australian Bureau of Statistics

    Australian standard geographical classification (ASGC)

    (2011)
  • Australian Institute of Health and Welfare

    2010 National drug strategy household survey report

    (2011)
  • S.B. Bacharach et al.

    Driven to drink: Managerial control, work-related risk factors, and employee problem drinking

    The Academy of Management Journal

    (2002)
  • A.R. Bass et al.

    Employee drug use, demographic characteristics, work reactions, and absenteeism

    Journal of Occupational Health Psychology

    (1996)
  • J.E. Bauer et al.

    A longitudinal assessment of the impact of smoke-free worksite policies on tobacco use

    American Journal of Public Health

    (2005)
  • M. Biron et al.

    Work-related risk factors and employee substance use: Insights from a sample of Israeli blue-collar workers

    Journal of Occupational Health Psychology

    (2011)
  • R. de Graff et al.

    Comparing the effects on work performance of mental and physical disorders

    Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology

    (2012)
  • Drugs and Crime Prevention Committee

    Inquiry into strategies to reduce harmful alcohol consumption: Final report

    (2006)
  • Cited by (39)

    • Patterns and correlates of workplace and non-workplace cannabis use among Canadian workers before the legalization of non-medical cannabis

      2021, Drug and Alcohol Dependence
      Citation Excerpt :

      However, results were not entirely consistent with this paradigm because perceptions of a supervisor's ability to manage use/impairment and awareness of workplace substance use policies were not related to workplace use. One study found basic workplace use policies were insufficient to reduce workplace drug use, whereas more comprehensive policies were effective (Pidd et al., 2016). Our survey did not assess the nature of the policy, which may have led to the lack of association.

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text