Veronica Cho: Dear G20 Leaders
You don't have to worry about hiding that bottle of Hennessy in your desk anymore. At least not if you work in Peru, where the nation's top court has ruled that workers can't be fired for being drunk on the job. Woo-hoo!Peru's Constitutional Tribunal has said that you can't get fired for being a little tipsy at work, as long as you're not hurting or offending anybody. Friendly Peruvian drunks everywhere breathed a boozy sigh of relief, while mean Peruvian drunks everywhere smashed a pool cue over somebody's head.
Some folks are worried that this might set a dangerous precedent, but, really, what could possibly go wrong with a nation full of inebriated workers? In fact, it's probably a great way to attract recent college grads.
Of course, the government is criticizing the court's decision, but that's just because somebody needs to teach those teetotalers how to get down.
Comments:
Add a comment
Saturday 17 January
By worldmade
I am sick of drunks at work. Why do we pretend the are not drunk or worse, treat them l;ike peers?
Reply
Sunday 18 January
By Vicki
Your remark.. Hold onto your hats! It's every man's dream come true: twins! is vulgar and an apology should be made! How dare you take these girls and make their lives about a man's fantasy. How about writing how they have lived normal iives? Talk about their accomplishments not what a man must be thinking.
Vicki
Reply
Sunday 25 January
By Matt
Exactly... whats wrong with keeping a buzz as long as it doesn't affect anyone else... you'd be surprised at how many people do it legally in the States with a prescription drug...
Sunday 25 January
By Phyllis
The State of California is a little hybrid on this issue. I don't recall the name of the Senate Bill right now, but paraphrased. And employee who is fired for drinking on the job is entitled to unemployment benefits unless you can prove by a preponderane of the evidence that the person is an alcoholic, then you may invoke the Senate Bill which causes the employee to forgoe his right to unemployment benefits and then he is ordered by the State of CA to attend and complete alcohol rehab if he is to be eligible for rehire or unemployment benefits while seeking another position. Basically, the law doesn't provide for the guy who decides to drink a few beers during lunch or even get hammered during lunch. You must wait for enough drinking on the job to prove he/she is an alcoholic. What is California thinking to when they make it possible for drinking on the job that can and does lead to voilence, illegal acts and theft in the work place. I fired an employee under this Senate Bill and believe me it was neither easy nor pretty. Now, of course I could have fired him and allowed him to go on his merry way and collect unemployment benefits, but why should I have allowed him to draw money from and cause our employment benefit rate to raises permananently while he walzed around drunk as a skunk wreaking havoc on everyone and everything. Personally, I think Peru is creating a workplace full of violence and haterd. Drinking on the job is never acceptable since you put the health well being and safety of others at risk. Wake up Peru and smell and drink the coffee of your country.
Reply
Sunday 25 January
By Laurie
Wow I wish that was how it was everywhere. Drinking at work would be heaven.
Reply
Thursday 12 March
By Grace
Emerald, you have no idea what you are talking about. It's not correct or ethical (in case you are a journalist is even worse) to inform just part of the whole information. You are insulting peruvians, you are insulting me and that makes you a very poor human being.
It's true that peruvian justice did that with one worker (he was a road sweeper), but our laws do not alow drunkers at work.
Of course the peruvian media and the civil society complained about this, because of course our justice did not act correctly in that case, but that does not mean that "top court has ruled that workers can't be fired for being drunk on the job", as you wrote it plunged in the biggest ignorance or consumed by evilness.
Reply