December 1998 Volume 79 Number 12 "serving the protectors"
Straight to the POINT
By Trevor Haskell   PASA Executive Committee Member

Kirk

During my years in SAPOL a number of characters have stood out for a variety of reasons. I was saddened recently to hear of the death of former sergeant, EVG Kirk, aged 82.

When I was a cadet, Ernie Kirk was already an academy legend and ruled the commandant's typing room with his trusty "sticky M'Cane". Those cadets daring to peek at the keys felt the lash of the cane on their knuckles, or the whack on the key guard.

Ernie taught typing and photography. The fact that so many still have touch typing skills is testament to his teaching, which is remarkable given the amazingly antiquated state of some of the machines - Imperials as I recall. He was an excellent photographer but an even better raconteur. He would willingly tell "waries" about the old days on the road. He created an aura about policing.

I remember him as the controller of the mess, and the collector of mess fees every second Thursday. A man of gruff exterior, he was often found to have a soft side. As I found later in my cadet years, he was a man devoted to his late wife, Lorna.

I recall his hand-painted, blood-red Volkswagen Beetle, his old bicycle and the day we gave him an honour guard as he rode off the parade ground and into his office in the drill hall. He seemed to enjoy his role.

Ernie contacted me a few years ago after a piece I'd written for the Police Journal. He reminisced about old times and told me the history of the Dulwich police station where Welfare Section is now based. He gave me a couple of old waries that were printed in the journal. He enjoyed police history.

Thanks for the memories, Sergeant EVG Kirk. Goodbye Ernie.

Alcohol and Other Drugs in the Workplace

The issue of drugs and work safety has been debated more and more in recent days. SAPOL is reviewing its existing policy because it does not provide clarity for employees and management.

Over a number of years, I and others have listened to and participated in debates at various levels about this issue. There are a number of philosophical decisions that need to be made when deciding on the direction of a policy.

I do not have the answers, and you may detect a bias from my words toward a rehabilitative model as opposed to a disciplinary model.

The Construction Industry Drug and Alcohol Committee has produced a very useful "information kit" on this topic. WorkCover has produced useful Guidelines for Drugs and Alcohol and the Workplace, and the Queensland Police Service - in conjunction with the Queensland University of Technology - has developed National Guidelines for Police Workplace Alcohol Policy and a separate Drugs Policy. The NPRU studies on alcohol use I have written of in previous columns.

All In One

The first point of debate is whether there should be separate policies for alcohol and other drugs. It is usually agreed that there is a number of drugs to be dealt with and the approaches may vary. Alcohol, prescription drugs (licit drugs), and illicit drugs are the three usual divides.

The debate for separate policies is couched in terms that alcohol, because of its legal status, possible inclusion as part of workplace culture and acceptability of use, is very different from "other drugs".

Discipline Focus Vs Rehabilitation Focus

This is a key area of debate. Some policies are clearly focused on discipline and then skew off and talk about support and rehabilitation on a pretext that they are support focused. Other policies take the tack towards support and rehabilitation as a primary and leave the discipline to those areas of workplace structure that would usually deal with performance and behavioural issues.

The discipline focus is more about negative reinforcement: don't do this; if you do I will find out; you will be punished; you may be dismissed; you are evil; I can't trust you; I must control you.

The rehabilitation focus is more towards a supportive model: I know people make mistakes; you must be responsible for your actions; I can assist you to deal with issues such as dependency; I will provide supports to aid you; I do require a standard of behaviour; I do have a responsibility for the health and safety of the workplace - so do you.

Testing

Here there is usually some heat in the debates. Some see testing as providing clarity for drug control. In fact, the scientific data provides that there are accepted blood-alcohol levels that are based on affected levels. A 0.05 per cent blood-alcohol level indicates a person is affected or impaired. It's quite clear - law is built on it.

Other drugs can be tested for and found to be in a person's system - so what? What is the accepted affect or impairment level for that drug?

If drug testing is to indicate impairment levels, then it can be accepted as relevant in regard to alcohol levels but not (at this time) for drug levels.

The next debates are:

• If testing is decided upon, what level do you test for?
• What is the acceptable level?
• Will everyone be tested?
• Will testing be random or targeted?
• Is testing compulsory?

Occupational Health and Safety

No policy can provide for any working person to be on duty affected or impaired by alcohol or any other drug. It is debated whether in some areas and in some circumstances alcohol can be consumed on duty, but being impaired on duty must affect safety and therefore cannot be condoned.

If a workplace deems alcohol usage (or other drug usage) is part of the requirement for that area, does this exclude non-users from working in that section? Is it reflected in the PID?

The most dangerous areas for police are around driving and weapon use (or carriage of) but, of course, general decision-making is also critical in many work areas. Impaired, affected by alcohol or any drug, one cannot be at the workplace.

Does a zero policy provide any usefulness? What are the cost implications, particularly to on-call workers?

New Policy

There will be a new policy. When it arrives, read it and provide comment to your local manager, consultative committee, OH & S committee and the Police Association.

I hope that we can move to a new policy that provides members with clarity of what is required of them, and where and how assistance can be provided. It must provide an opportunity for supervisors to take action to ensure workplace safety.