Pathways into individual substance misuse recovery agreement in the workplace
Background and aim: Substance use by employees is associated with negative consequences for the workplace in terms of absence and impaired work performance. Substance use problems may also reduce the probability of obtaining employment and increase the risk of exiting the labor force. In Norway, individual recovery agreements (IRA) between employers and employees with substance use or gambling problems are used in many workplaces to support employees’ recovery from addiction. Agreements formalize employers and employees’ responsibilities in the employees’ recovery process and often include measures like mandatory drug tests and meetings with health workers and managers. In some situations, an IRA may be the only solution for the employee to keep their job. Little is known about pathways of entry into IRAs, and whether and how this may impact employees’ experiences of the agreement period and their recovery process. In this study, we explore (1) pathways of entry into IRA’s, (2) how pathways of entry may affect employees’ experience with the intervention.
Methods: Qualitative interviews were conducted during autumn and winter of 2023 and 2024 with 24 employees aged 27-66 years, 25 % women) currently or previously enrolled in a substance use recovery agreement at their workplace, with a typical duration of 2 years. 75% of the agreements concerned alcohol use, the remaining 25% illegal drugs. The participants were recruited from the Norwegian workplace advisory centre for drug and addiction problems (Akan). Interview questions focused upon process into and reasons for entry into the agreement and experiences with the requirements regulated by the agreement. The interview data was coded using HyperResearch qualitative data analysis software and will be analysed thematically.
Results: Preliminary analyses suggest two main pathways of entry into individual substance use recovery agreements. First, agreements may be initiated after confrontations with colleagues or managers about breaking work regulations because of the employee’s substance use (e.g., showing up at work in an intoxicated state). Second, employees may initiate the agreement themselves to seek help with their substance use problem. Further analyses will explore employees’ experiences with these different ways of entry into IRA’s, focusing on aspects such as the significance of inner versus outer motivation and perceiving the agreement as control versus help and support for the employees’ recovery and experience of the agreement period.
Conclusion: Will follow after complete analyses.
