jozzie2000
Well-Known Member
I never said or implied that a drunk operator was better because of it; I was making a point that many alcoholics I worked with had a good work ethic in spite of their addiction. And I have never been outperformed by someone that was drunk or high.
Your point about managers being less of an immediate threat is taken... however they can still make decisions that get someone injured or killed.
Exactly. It isn't a question if they are good or not when they are under the influence, its all about liability. It isnt the operator that gets sued when he kills someone on site, it is the company. There goes your reputation, and half of your equipment on a lawsuit.
I had a foreman tell me a story one time about how he was working down in Arkansas somewhere and they had a trackhoe operator down there that was apparently just a deadeye finish operator. They were talking one day and he smelled alcohol on his breath. When confronted about it, he admitted immediately that he had 4 or 5 before work. Foreman laughed and sent him home, told him he couldn't do that anymore and to come back tomorrow.
Operator came back tomorrow and just wasnt worth a ****. Whether he was hung over, or going through withdrawls, or what I guess I won't ever know for sure, but the implied ending to the story was that he was just a better operator when he was drunk! Eventually they just had to fire him because he wasn't worth a damn sober. Kind of got a kick out of the idea.
Unfortunately no matter how good you are, the potential of getting someone hurt on site by someone under the influence just isn't worth any skill level of an operator.