Helping staff get back on track

A groundbreaking drugs and alcohol advice service has helped London Underground tackle a culture of misuse, reduce sickness absence and improve productivity. Alex Blyth reports

The business

London Underground (LU) is a major business carrying some 3 million passengers a day. It runs 511 trains on 253 miles of track and employs more than 12,000. It has an HR team of 386.

The challenge

When, in July 2003, the London Evening Standard claimed that a culture of "drink and drug abuse" was prevalent among LU employees and subcontractors, the company was able to point to its highly successful programme for tackling alcohol abuse. While crashes, strikes, and part-privatisation have kept LU in the headlines, few have noticed the work done by LU manager Nigel Radcliffe and his team in building the groundbreaking drug and alcohol advisory service.

LU set up the unit in 1993 in response to new legislation that would hold organisations liable if they failed to show due diligence in ensuring that those in control of public transport were not intoxicated. Random testing was introduced and Radcliffe was hired to set up and manage the unit.

Radcliffe describes the culture of alcohol abuse. "The depots all had bars. Shift workers would drink together before doing the night shift, and management turned a blind eye."

The implications of this lack of action went beyond immediate concerns over criminal prosecution. Alcohol Concern estimates that absenteeism and low productivity as a direct result of alcohol abuse costs the UK £2bn a year, and LU was certainly bearing heavy costs in this respect.

Radcliffe describes how the unit faced tough decisions from the outset. "A core issue was how to deal with someone in a safety-critical job who has just admitted to an alcohol problem. We have to stand the employee down from their job, but we also have to honour our promise to protect their job. For this reason, it is crucially important to hire top-quality assessment staff, but many companies balk at the cost and effort required. There are a handful of consultancies offering the service, but we decided to build the expertise entirely in-house."

The unit helps about 100 employees each year, with about 60 per cent having a serious problem. The first stage is a three-week assessment programme, at the end of which a contract is signed. The contract details the requirements of the company for that individual to return to their job. Fifty per cent require residential treatment and most of this is done through a cost-sharing arrangement with local authorities. Treatment frequently takes up to a year to complete. The programme costs almost £500,000 a year, and has faced considerable opposition from parts of the organisation. However, after 10 years, the results speak for themselves.

The outcome

Eighty per cent of those who go through the programme return to work within a year. Prior to treatment, those with an alcohol problem take an average of 30 days' sick leave, while after treatment this falls to just seven days. When you consider the numbers involved, LU is recouping a fair amount of its investment purely in terms of attendance.

Minimising the risk of prosecution, improved productivity and employee motivation are also significant benefits for LU, but Radcliffe has been most surprised by the shift in attitudes. "Early on there was massive resistance from unions and management to interference with drinking. Now, drinking at work is perceived to be just as socially unacceptable as drink driving."

The employee perspective

John has worked for LU since 1983. He describes the drink culture of the early days. "You weren't one of the gang if you didn't drink. I remember many instances of people not getting overtime because they hadn't been in the pub before the night shift."

He was a heavy drinker in, around and outside of work. When LU introduced random testing, he began to take time off. This continued until the year 2000, when he was close to being sacked for persistent absence and so approached the unit.

"I spent six weeks denying my problem before I agreed to go into residential treatment. I was there from November to March, during which time the company continued to pay me. After about 100 days back at work I relapsed, but went straight back to the unit, where we agreed that I needed to start attending AA meetings. By September, I was able to get back to work again and since then everything has gone well," he says.

John is now a track access controller, earning about £40,000 a year and doing an important, demanding job for LU. He has no hesitation in praising the unit.

"If the unit had not been there, I would probably be dead by now. I know how much the company has invested in me. I just hope that I have been able to repay that investment."

Learning points for HR

Radcliffe has four pieces of advice for anyone wanting to set up a similar scheme:

- Before you start, be very clear about the relationship between advisory and disciplinary processes

- Ensure the people you hire are good enough to deal with the extremely difficult jobs you will ask of them

- Educate management to ensure buy-in

- Be aware of the scale of what you are getting into.