SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA CAREERS / THE PATCHWORK OFFICE : The Road Back From Addiction: Thorny on Both Sides

He was a lifelong drinker who had kept it in check. His career, he says, had been “exemplary,” his job attendance spotless. In some 26 years as a senior executive with a major aerospace firm in Los Angeles, he’d taken only a dozen sick days.

Then his marriage of 25 years broke up, and he was forced to live alone for the first time in his life. The result was disastrous:

“I started drinking more,” he says. “I started missing a day or two of work, binge drinking for two or three days over a weekend. I realized it had gotten out of my control.”

He did what any smart, discreet alcoholic would do under the circumstances: called a friend who referred him to Alcoholics Anonymous. But three months of sobriety came to naught when his company sent him out of town for a yearlong assignment and he tumbled hard and fast off the wagon.

Several months later, during a lull on the job, he called the same friend, but with different results. This time, the advice was a month in the hospital. This time, he had to tell his company. This time, the risks were higher than ever.

“I was worried, but at that point I had surrendered,” he recalls. “I’d do whatever it took, lose status at work. I felt like if I didn’t get some help, I was probably going to lose everything.”

This man was lucky, and so was his firm. He kept his job; the company kept a valuable worker. After six years sober--and effective--he retired on schedule with the honor he deserved. But the trip from addiction to rehabilitation and back to work was a harrowing one--and continues to be for millions of workers and businesses throughout the country.

What to do with addicted workers is one of the thorniest problems facing American business today. Despite a war on drugs that has lasted more than a decade, chemical dependency costs American businesses more than $40 billion each year in lost productivity alone, according to the National Council on Alcoholism and Drug Dependency.

An estimated 70% of all adult users of illegal drugs are employed, according to the council; up to 40% of all industrial fatalities and 47% of industrial injuries can be linked to alcohol.

State and federal laws do provide some job protection for addicted workers, as long as their job performance is not impaired and they do not use drugs or alcohol on the job. Even if the laws offered no protection, few companies want to fire a capable and talented worker. For one thing, the costs of retraining are too high.

“Most people with those kinds of problems are more often than not better-than-average employees,” says Herman Bose, vice president of Local 9400 of the Communications Workers of America union and a certified alcohol and drug abuse counselor. “They can do an average job and juggle their problems as well. . . . Just think of how well they’d do if you got them clean and sober.”

The question for workers, of course, is how to get clean and sober without being fired; for companies, how to manage a worker’s recovery. Between good intention and legal protection, there is ample room for trouble.

“There is not necessarily a bright line between active use and reform,” says Joel P. Kelly, a Los Angeles attorney who specializes in workplace issues and represents companies. “You typically see people slide in and out, which may create some problems for employers.”

A few certainties do exist: Current drug or alcohol abusers who are not seeking treatment are generally not protected by the law. Workers can be fired if their job performance is impaired or if they use drugs or alcohol on the job.

However, the California Labor Code states that if a worker with a chemical dependency problem voluntarily seeks rehabilitation, a company with 25 or more employees must accommodate that person. In other words, you cannot be fired simply for saying you have a problem and are seeking help.

In addition, the Americans With Disabilities Act makes it illegal to discriminate against someone who has had a past alcohol or drug problem and is in recovery.

On the plus side, an increasing number of large companies now have so-called employee assistance programs, confidential counseling and referral services for workers with personal problems. The National Council on Alcoholism and Drug Dependency estimates that 90% of all Fortune 500 firms have EAPs, which are often the first and best place for a troubled worker to turn for help.

On the minus side, most people do not work for big companies. In addition, as companies continue to pare down health insurance coverage by turning to managed-care programs, services for people with drug and alcohol problems are disappearing.

The typical 28-day hospital rehabilitation program has metamorphosed into a three- to five-day detox and counseling, says Dean Gautschy, director of the CareUnit program at Pacifica Hospital of the Valley.

Gautschy has some advice for workers with chemical problems. The major component, of course, is “Get help.” If you work for a company with an EAP, use that service. It will help to assess what you need, from AA to a hospital stay.

Do you tell your boss? It depends. “If the person is very uncomfortable and confidentiality is at stake, they can explain to the boss that they need medical treatment and need to be checked into the hospital,” Gautschy says.

Confidential EAP programs can also help employers, who can use them as a resource for referring troubled workers.

Confronting an addicted employee, while difficult, is also necessary--pointing out the lapses in the office and strongly suggesting that the worker get help.

But such intervention is only workable if there is specific documentation: You missed five Mondays in December. The safety officer says you mishandled equipment last Thursday. Unless you get some help, we’ll have to let you go.

“You have to do it with care and concern,” Gautschy says.

Returning to work after rehabilitation is another sticky situation. Workers need to realize it takes time to rebuild trust on the job. Employers need to support recovering workers--but also monitor their recovery.

“The main thing,” says Gautschy, “is to look at the performance of the employee and treat the employee as a regular worker returning from an illness.”