Sure sounds like you need to start hanging with a better crowd. I certainly hope you never get into a car with any of them after they've been drinking. I'm not sure how quality of an employee they can be if they can't abide by laws and regulations. If they don't care to break laws about drinking and driving then I'm sure it would be no problem for them to come in to work late, or leave early.

 

Or under the influence.

If it was 9 years ago, he could have those prior DUI's expunged. Therefore, no proof.

 

I don't know, just saying.

 

 

Well if they were expunged I doubt we would be talking about it.

Sure sounds like you need to start hanging with a better crowd. I certainly hope you never get into a car with any of them after they've been drinking. I'm not sure how quality of an employee they can be if they can't abide by laws and regulations. If they don't care to break laws about drinking and driving then I'm sure it would be no problem for them to come in to work late, or leave early.

 

Who said anything about hanging out with them? In order to know someone, I have to hang out with them....That's a new one to me. :idunno:

 

Like I said, I'm glad the morality police are out on this one. Good to see some on here have never made mistakes or done something they've regretted after the fact.

 

Not sure how making a bad decision after a weekend night of drinking has any bearing on one's job performance, but if you say so....

Not sure how making a bad decision after a weekend night of drinking has any bearing on one's job performance, but if you say so....

 

 

11,773 people died in alcohol-impaired driving crashes last year. Drunk driving fatalities accounted for 32% of all traffic deaths last year, that is, on average someone is killed in an alcohol-impaired driving crash every 45 minutes in the U.S. (Source: NHTSA/FARS, 2009)

 

 

I'd say it had a bearing on the job performance of several thousand people.

11,773 people died in alcohol-impaired driving crashes last year. Drunk driving fatalities accounted for 32% of all traffic deaths last year, that is, on average someone is killed in an alcohol-impaired driving crash every 45 minutes in the U.S. (Source: NHTSA/FARS, 2009)

 

 

I'd say it had a bearing on the job performance of several thousand people.

 

Once again, what does that have to do with their ability to do their job?

Once again, what does that have to do with their ability to do their job?

 

 

 

Well if they're dead, or if they killed someone else then it's kind of hard to do their job.

Well if they're dead, or if they killed someone else then it's kind of hard to do their job.

 

Well, if they're dead, they don't have a DUI now do they?

 

We're talking about people that are in the workforce with DUI's on their record, are we not? If they are in the workforce, it's safe to say they were not killed, or did not kill anyone. You made the claim that they were not, or could not be, quality employees...I ask once again, how come?

Well, if they're dead, they don't have a DUI now do they?

 

We're talking about people that are in the workforce with DUI's on their record, are we not? If they are in the workforce, it's safe to say they were not killed, or did not kill anyone. You made the claim that they were not, or could not be, quality employees...I ask once again, how come?

 

 

And I told you. If a person can't abide by laws concerning drinking and driving then what makes you think they are going to abide by the policies and procedures set forth by the company they work for.

And I told you. If a person can't abide by laws concerning drinking and driving then what makes you think they are going to abide by the policies and procedures set forth by the company they work for.

 

 

So you're ok if a person is a "functioning alcoholic" as long as they don't drink and drive?

 

That is so not a fair assessment at all. Do you feel the same about infidelity? What about people with poor credit? For that matter, it's illegal to litter! Is everyone who throws a soda can out the window at risk? What about the guy who speeds? Or those who race through "pink" lights?

 

Human beings are not so simple to pigeonhole, LRCW.

And I told you. If a person can't abide by laws concerning drinking and driving then what makes you think they are going to abide by the policies and procedures set forth by the company they work for.

 

I'll give this one a shot:

 

I think everyone considers drinking & driving a mistake. I am not condoning drinking & driving, nor do I drink & drive, so let's get that out of the way.

 

The problem is, people have a few drinks, start feeling good, but ultimately want to get back home. The only consequence many of them are thinking of is getting home, and most think they can do so safely. It's a mistake that isn't worth making.

 

Breaking company policy speaks more about your ethics. DUI's can be attributed to one stupid night (or in some cases a late night golf trip). DUIs are not calculated risks...I'm not trying to downplay DUIs, but I would hire someone with a DUI before someone who extorted money or broke some other type of serious company policy. One goes to your integrity and trustworthiness.

 

With that said, Strickland's past, much like Billy Clyde's, has a history of this type of behavior. It wouldn't surprise me if part of the outrage over this stems from the Billy G era. :lol:

So you're ok if a person is a "functioning alcoholic" as long as they don't drink and drive?

 

That is so not a fair assessment at all. Do you feel the same about infidelity? What about people with poor credit? For that matter, it's illegal to litter! Is everyone who throws a soda can out the window at risk? What about the guy who speeds? Or those who race through "pink" lights?

 

Human beings are not so simple to pigeonhole, LRCW.

 

 

I've worked for two companies that do very thorough back ground checks when screening potential employees, and yes that has included running credit checks. I also don't know of any alcoholics that didn't let their drinking influence their job performance. I also once held a job that if I had two or more speeding violations in a two year span I would have lost my job. So in answer to your question, yes.

I've worked for two companies that do very thorough back ground checks when screening potential employees, and yes that has included running credit checks. I also don't know of any alcoholics that didn't let their drinking influence their job performance. I also once held a job that if I had two or more speeding violations in a two year span I would have lost my job. So in answer to your question, yes.

 

 

You would be surprised at the number of alcoholics that are able to function quite well, and completely undetected, in their jobs.

 

So, you are 0 tolerance. No gray areas. No second chances. Screw up and you lose your job.

You would be surprised at the number of alcoholics that are able to function quite well, and completely undetected, in their jobs.

 

So, you are 0 tolerance. No gray areas. No second chances. Screw up and you lose your job.

 

 

I didn't say that. Let's be honest here. A lot of it depends on what your job is. Should a policeman that has two DUI's be expected to keep his job? Would having those two DUI's affect the way he does his job differently than a guy that flips burgers at McDonald's? How about a bank president that has had to file for bankruptcy two times? Would that affect the way he is looked at by the board of directors differently than a person who cleans carpets for Stanley Steamer. Coach Strickland has a job, and responsibilities that having two previously convicted DUI's and now arrested for a third that could great influence the way he is able to do his job. Can he be expected to go recruit players if he doesn't have a drivers license? Could he sit down, and talk to a player's parents and convince them that as an assistant coach for the University of Kentucky that he can be trusted to look out for the well being of their children?

I didn't say that. Let's be honest here. A lot of it depends on what your job is. Should a policeman that has two DUI's be expected to keep his job? Would having those two DUI's affect the way he does his job differently than a guy that flips burgers at McDonald's? How about a bank president that has had to file for bankruptcy two times? Would that affect the way he is looked at by the board of directors differently than a person who cleans carpets for Stanley Steamer. Coach Strickland has a job, and responsibilities that having two previously convicted DUI's and now arrested for a third that could greatly influence the way he is able to do his job. Can he be expected to go recruit players if he doesn't have a drivers license? Could he sit down, and talk to a player's parents and convince them that as an assistant coach for the University of Kentucky that he can be trusted to look out for the well being of their children?

 

This pretty much sums it up for me as well...

You would be surprised at the number of alcoholics that are able to function quite well, and completely undetected, in their jobs.

 

So, you are 0 tolerance. No gray areas. No second chances. Screw up and you lose your job.

 

Sounds to me like we all have to be the perfect person to be a quality employee in LRCW's eyes. I'm sure glad employers aren't as judgemental as he is.