The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCOM 0990.015 1996-1998 Hawaii Island Chamber of Commerce \.~Established in 1897 • 232 Kamehameha Ave. • Hilo. Hawaii 96720 • Phone (808) 935-7178 f ~n RECEIVED 1Tme_`. - -rt~, - November 17' 1998 Date_-_- - County Coundl if7 ~ Chairman Aaron Chung Finance Committee Hawaii County Council 25 Aupuni Street Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Re: Resolution No. 328-98, Communication No. 990 Dear Chairman Chung and Committee Members, The Third Annual Survey of Restaurant and Fast Food Employees indicated that 25% of 1,375 employees surveyed admitted to using drugs and alcohol or being hungover at work at least once in the last six months. This 1998 survey was conducted by the National Food Service Security Council and London House. The survey looked at costly counter pro- ductive behavior such as theft, unsafe work practices, absenteeism, poor customer service. Results show that substance abusers were much more likely than non-abusers to engage in counterproductive behavior such as stealing, being absent or late for work, acting unsafely on the job, and breaking house rules (see Drug and Alcohol Use excerpt). We support any efforts which curve the availability of drugs within the workplace and community. Count'. No. 90 (r PYIe No. Q 5G 1W. TO, Presented F c- D86k NIy l q 199 Atfiliatea . ,Th tl-e Chamber of Commerce of the UrItea States 1W. Page 2 November 17, 1998 Sincerely, ,4' Stafford Oyama Retail Committee Third= Annual Survey of q Restaurant, and Fast Food EmPIo yees ' 1 j .4F~T° i 3 .r.. L '1 ,Y'V Y. ~~ilh+~94.gy~'lt~ '~F Md' 2{. r G~ i, .1~ volt - n3 s i ' : a v Nei. S All ~ 1 Y5 yy me0t). roue t ~V V` Workforce Develop Naf ional Food Service: Security chi-MCi. I . . DRUG AND ALCOHOL USE The survey included four items concerning the respondents' use of drugs and alcohol in the workplace (see Table 2). Twenty-five percent of the respondents admitted that they had used drugs or alcohol on the job or come to work hungover from drugs or alcohol at least once in the last six months. In particular, the findings showed that: 22 percent admitted coming to work hungover from alcohol 4 percent said they had consumed alcohol or the job 4 percent admitted coming to work hungover from drugs 3 percent said they used drugs at work Substance abusers tended to be 16-20 years old, work 40 hours per week, have three or more employers in the last year and plan to quit within the next six months. There was no significant difference between males and females. SUBSTANCE ABUSE AND OTHER BEHAVIORS Substance abuse is considered to be a significant problem in the workplace because it is believed to be highly related to other forms of counterproductivity such as absenteeism, accidents, irresponsibility and poor performance and customer service. We investigated the strength of these relationships in the restaurant industry by comparing the preva- lence of several productive and counterproductive behaviors for abusers and non- abusers of drugs and alcohol. Results showed that substance abusers were much more likely than non-abusers to engage in other counterproductive acts such as stealing from their employer, helping others to steal, being absent or late to work, acting unsafely on the job and behaving irresponsibly. For example, substance abusers admitted to stealing over two times more cash and merchandise ($156 vs. $77) than non-abusers (see Figure 6). In addition, Table 8 shows that substance abusers were also more likely to commit other counter- productive acts such as: damage company property while horsing around (34% vs. I I take company merchandise (31%vs. 16%) be absent without an excuse (26% vs. 15%) act unsafely (52% vs. 3696) avoid helping a customer (55% vs. 33%) 14 Average Annual Admitted Theft $160 $156 $140 $120 $100 $80 $77 $60 $40 $20 o $0 Abusers Non-Abusers b0 LL Substance abusers were also less likely than non-abusers to engage in positive behaviors such as remaining pleasant to a rude customer very often (39% vs. 45%) and going out of the way to help a co-worker very often (58% vs. 65%). However, these differences are not as strong as with the counterproductive behaviors. This pattern of results is consistent with problem behavior theory (lessor & lessor, 1977; 1978) which is illustrated in Figure 7. From this perspective, substance abuse does not directly cause counterprodudivity and poor performance. Rather, substance abuse and other forms of counterprodudivity such as theft, irresponsibility and unsafe behaviors are all influenced by an overall propensity to commit deviant behavior. These results have significant implications for organizational interventions. To the extent that a syndrome of deviant behavior exists, employee selection systems may take on ncrea~ante. Organizations may find it less costly to screen out potentially deviant applicants than deal with a whole range of deviant behaviors after hire. These results also suggest that organizations may be able to use one or two measures of deviant behavior, such as predictors of substance abuse or honesty and avoid hiring individuals who may engage in many different forms of counterproductive behavior. IS