TOTALLY GEEKED!

Among drunks, the rights of one individual are not important.

I'd like to know where those Friday bashes are happening? And, if they aren't at work, doesn't mean she necessarily has to go to them. Also some people are always offended as well. So what if people say" here have a drink". Just keep saying no thanks, no thanks, no thanks. After awhile people will get the hint. Or just ignore it. It's really not a big deal to drink if you dont' make it a big deal.

So? Work is work. Not everyone is fun. So what? It's about getting the job done.

Because if you read the letter, it DOES cause an issue.
- weltschmerz

____________________________

I believe it was co-workers trying to force drinks on the LW that caused the problem.

I wonder if the LW is a bit too apologetic about it? I find with bullies like that it's better to just state the facts lightly and Nonapologetically and keep moving. And they tend to leave me alone. Remember the threads from the old board about forced socialization at work? Sometimes people smell weakness and pick on you because they think they can. If that makes sense 😀

Mary Zombie wrote:

---

I wonder if the LW is a bit too apologetic about it? I find with bullies like that it's better to just state the facts lightly and Nonapologetically and keep moving. And they tend to leave me alone. Remember the threads from the old board about forced socialization at work? Sometimes people smell weakness and pick on you because they think they can. If that makes sense 😀

---

 Probably.  Plus, she is relying on management to help her, and they obviously are not going to.

Empyreal wrote:

---

Just say to them "Look, last time I drank alcohol, I blew chunks!"

When they come back with "it's okay, just drink slower and eat more"

Reply "You don't understand!  Chunks is my dog!"

 

 I'm sorry.  It's old and lame but I swear every time, there's a person who hasn't ever heard it! 

---

Never hear it!  But I will add it to my joke stash!!!!  

huskerbb wrote:

---

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:

---

I'd like to know where those Friday bashes are happening? And, if they aren't at work, doesn't mean she necessarily has to go to them. Also some people are always offended as well. So what if people say" here have a drink". Just keep saying no thanks, no thanks, no thanks. After awhile people will get the hint. Or just ignore it. It's really not a big deal to drink if you dont' make it a big deal.

---

 They must be at work.  We used to do it at my old job.  Someone would go get a case of beer at closing time and some of us would sit around for an hour or so and drink it.

---

 Wow.  I just can't imagine that being accepted practice nowadays.  I find that really unbelievable.

huskerbb wrote:

---

just Czech wrote:

---

Mellow Momma wrote:

---

huskerbb wrote:

---

Bonny22Pye wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

weltschmerz wrote:

---

Ohfour wrote:

---

weltschmerz wrote:

---

Just say "I have 10 years of sobriety" and leave it at that. They don't have to know why and won't press drinks on you.

---

Why lie?  Why can't he tell the truth (even under pressure) without causing an issue? 

---

Because if you read the letter, it DOES cause an issue. 

---

 And it should not.  The employer is in the wrong.

---

 This whole scenario seems like a lawsuit ready to happen.  The employer could get in trouble for forcing alcohol on people and religious discrimination

---

 It isn't necessarily the employer--but the co-workers.

I don't think she will ever fit in at this company.  She is always going to be perceived as the religious nut.  Right, wrong, or indifferent--that is the reality. 

---

 If it happens at work and the management knows about it - then it IS the employer. If management doesn't stop it, then they sanction it. 

---

 I have to agree with this. If they are not against it, then they sanction it.

Sound familiar? LOL

---

 They do sanction it.  Duh.  They even called her in to tell her to keep her religion at home.  

---

  The boss is a jerk, she wasn't trying to convert  anyone but just simply said why she chose not to drink.

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:

---

I can't imagine any workplace allowing this. What about the liability to the business and so forth? That seems really incredible.

---

All of our sister companies do this.  The one s NY actually have a bar in the breakroom.  

As an attorney, I find that horrifying. Especially if the workplace is supplying the alcohol.

Can they be sued if someone is caught drinking and driving? This is just not right.

A couple of months ago, we had a release party for one of our artists and had catered Mexican food, complete with Sangrias...Not everyone drank, of course.

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

Ohfour wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

As an attorney, I find that horrifying. Especially if the workplace is supplying the alcohol.

---

What is the difference in this and going out to a bar right after work?  Or drinking at the (lunchtime) Christmas Party?

There are A LOT of places around here that have the "Friday Drink Cart".  About 3:00, someone pushes around something akin to an ice cream cooler that has beer, wine, and bottled ****tails... 

---

 Well, there's the theory of Respondeat Superior for one thing.  Then, there's the classic Dram Shop laws.  All sorts of liability on the employer's part if a drunk employee hurts someone. 

---

English please?  

Ohfour wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

As an attorney, I find that horrifying. Especially if the workplace is supplying the alcohol.

---

What is the difference in this and going out to a bar right after work?  Or drinking at the (lunchtime) Christmas Party?

There are A LOT of places around here that have the "Friday Drink Cart".  About 3:00, someone pushes around something akin to an ice cream cooler that has beer, wine, and bottled ****tails... 

---

 The difference is the work place knowing and sanctioning it.  That's the difference.  If you all meet up at a bar or someone's house, then you can't get into their deep pockets.  I think that is exposing your business to a lot of liability.  It isn't somehting i would allow.

Ohfour wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

Ohfour wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

As an attorney, I find that horrifying. Especially if the workplace is supplying the alcohol.

---

What is the difference in this and going out to a bar right after work?  Or drinking at the (lunchtime) Christmas Party?

There are A LOT of places around here that have the "Friday Drink Cart".  About 3:00, someone pushes around something akin to an ice cream cooler that has beer, wine, and bottled ****tails... 

---

 Well, there's the theory of Respondeat Superior for one thing.  Then, there's the classic Dram Shop laws.  All sorts of liability on the employer's part if a drunk employee hurts someone. 

---

English please?  

---

 Respondeat Superior stands for "let the master answer" and says the employer is responsibility for the actions of the employee while they are working.  Dram shop laws are mainly for SELLERS of alcohol and say if you sell alcohol to a visibly intoxicated person, you can be held liable for what they do while drunk - and there are laws very similar for social hosts.  If you serve alcohol to someone you know is drunk, you can be held liable for any injuries sustained as a result thereof. 

With the ABUNDANCE of legal hoops that we have to jump through every day, I'm sure that if our corporate legal department had a problem with it, they would put a stop to it. We're not even allowed to be taken to lunch by a vendor because that may seem like a bribe. They don't have an issue with drinking at work though...

Employer Pays Almost $1 Million after Drunk Employee Kills Child

A major case occurred in 1992, when an employer was held liable after an employee got drunk at a professional trade meeting attended by other company employees. As he was driving home, the employee ran a stop sign and crashed into another car, killing the driver's son. The employee had had several drinks with the company's president and other employees, all of which were deducted as business expenses. Everyone watched as the employee left the bar, slurring his words. But nobody stopped him. The jury ordered the employer to pay $80,000 to compensate the victim's father and another $800,000 for punitive damages. On appeal, the Florida court upheld the verdict because the employer:
Told employees to attend the meeting to benefit the business;
Paid for all meeting expenses, including drinks;
Reimbursed travel expenses to and from the meeting;
Encouraged employees to entertain clients and buy them drinks at these types of meetings; and
Let the employee leave by himself, despite evidence that he was too drunk to drive.

Holding the employer responsible for the employee's drunken conduct might seem unfair. After all, the employee was a responsible adult capable of making his own decisions. But the court in this case said that the employer should be responsible because it had more control over the actions of its employees than other kinds of hosts typically have over their guests Carroll Air Systems, Inc. v. Greenbaum, 629 So. 2d 914 (Fla. App. 1992).

As the Carroll case shows, employers are especially vulnerable when they require their workers to attend a function or drink with clients. In 2002, the Supreme Court of Texas said that an employer who required employees to drink with clients could be responsible for injuries resulting from the employees' intoxication. In that case, an exotic dance club required dancers to drink with the club's clients to boost their bar tabs D. Houston, Inc. v. Love, 92 S.W.3d 450 (Tex. 2002)].

Ohfour wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

Maybe Tennessee's laws are more slack on it.

---

NYC is where they have the bars in the office.  And that's where our legal dept is and where our AP department is... 

---

 I think they are nuts. 

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

Employer Pays Almost $1 Million after Drunk Employee Kills Child

A major case occurred in 1992, when an employer was held liable after an employee got drunk at a professional trade meeting attended by other company employees. As he was driving home, the employee ran a stop sign and crashed into another car, killing the driver's son. The employee had had several drinks with the company's president and other employees, all of which were deducted as business expenses. Everyone watched as the employee left the bar, slurring his words. But nobody stopped him. The jury ordered the employer to pay $80,000 to compensate the victim's father and another $800,000 for punitive damages. On appeal, the Florida court upheld the verdict because the employer:
Told employees to attend the meeting to benefit the business;
Paid for all meeting expenses, including drinks;
Reimbursed travel expenses to and from the meeting;
Encouraged employees to entertain clients and buy them drinks at these types of meetings; and
Let the employee leave by himself, despite evidence that he was too drunk to drive.

Holding the employer responsible for the employee's drunken conduct might seem unfair. After all, the employee was a responsible adult capable of making his own decisions. But the court in this case said that the employer should be responsible because it had more control over the actions of its employees than other kinds of hosts typically have over their guests Carroll Air Systems, Inc. v. Greenbaum, 629 So. 2d 914 (Fla. App. 1992).

As the Carroll case shows, employers are especially vulnerable when they require their workers to attend a function or drink with clients. In 2002, the Supreme Court of Texas said that an employer who required employees to drink with clients could be responsible for injuries resulting from the employees' intoxication. In that case, an exotic dance club required dancers to drink with the club's clients to boost their bar tabs D. Houston, Inc. v. Love, 92 S.W.3d 450 (Tex. 2002)].

---

 So what?  We have meetings all the time paid for by the company where we drink.  

I would start reciting the varied reason not to drink and keep going till they tell me to stop.

I had a friend / loved one that was killed by a drunk driver / died after driving drunk, and I have yet to get over it.
My childhood was filled with incidences from an alcoholic parent and I prefer to not perpetuate the pattern.
I am on medication.
I am a recovering alcoholic.
I can't hold my liquore worth a damn and I really prefer to NOT ruin my shoes.
My religion prefers me to avoid alcohol.
I have never been able to enjoy the taist so I quit trying.
Bad things happen when I enjoy a ****tail. Ever see the movie Nadine? Yeah. It was based on me.
I have a much better time staying sober while watching everyone else make bigger and bigger fools of themselves as the night progresses... By the way, let me get you a refill. You look like you need another.

My little friend Marco was killed by a drunk driver.
He was seven.

I think being out at a company party or event is different than at the work site.

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:

---

I think being out at a company party or event is different than at the work site.

---

 Yes, it is.  Especially when a restaurant is serving the alcohol and not the employer themselves.