(sitting alone) Mr S Blair v Represented by:10 Mr D James - Advocate One Subsea UK Limited — 2023

The claimant, a field service specialist working offshore, was dismissed after failing two breathalyser screenings at a heliport in Dakar on 21 March 2022. He contended that the readings were false positives caused by mouthwash and that he should have been given a third breath test or a blood test. The respondent relied on the two positive readings, the calibration and other screening evidence, and the account of Mr Michie that the claimant had said he had consumed wine on the flight to Senegal the previous evening.

The tribunal held that the respondent had shown a potentially fair reason for dismissal, namely conduct. It accepted that Mr Lawrence believed the claimant had consumed alcohol before travelling offshore and that there were reasonable grounds for that belief. The tribunal found the investigation to be within the range of reasonable investigations, noting the interviews, the review of the breathalyser data and calibration information, the medical advice obtained, and the further enquiries made after the claimant raised issues about the tests and the absence of a blood test.

The tribunal considered the respondent's substance abuse policy, which contained inconsistent wording about screening and disciplinary action. It found that, despite that inconsistency, the respondent's interpretation of the policy and its reliance on the breathalyser results were not outside the band of reasonable responses in the circumstances, particularly given the zero-tolerance offshore context and the claimant's acknowledged awareness of that approach. Applying section 98(4) ERA 1996, and having regard to the procedural fairness of the investigation, disciplinary and appeal stages, the tribunal held that dismissal was within the range of reasonable responses, albeit at the harsh end of the spectrum, and dismissed the claim.