Maloney, W F (1988) Substance abuse in construction. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 114(4), pp. 614-630. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
A survey was conducted on contractors, labor union officials, owners, and designers to gather data on the extent and cost of substance abuse in the engineering and construction industry. Approximately 10% of the persons in this industry are perceived as having substance abuse problems with a resulting cost to the industry of approximately $10 billion. Alcohol is the primary problem followed by marijuana and cocaine. The respondents perceive the substance abuse problem to be greater in the industry as a whole than it is in their particular firms. Drug testing is becoming more prevalent, particularly for pre-employment situations. Employee assistance programs are being developed to help workers get help to overcome their problem. Many employers still have the attitude of identify the abusers and terminate them.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | alcohol, employee assistance program, survey, construction industry, labour union, testing, employment, owner, designer, becoming |
| Subjects: | management, economics, industry analysis, philosophical process, sociology, profession, data collection methods, professional practice, psychology |
| Topics: | Roles and Professions, Stakeholder Management, Health and Safety, Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Organizational Design, Human Resources |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTE |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here