And the fair, it should be added. In any case, the verdict, which he ruled - just the same pattern of service letter of the law.
The essence of the conflict is very simple. A garbage man had a habit to go about their work duties previously taking on the chest. In remarks did not respond. As a result was dismissed. Usually at this and similar stories end.
However, illegally offended was quite cunning type. As for the garbage man - so sure. He filed against the company. And, after considering all the circumstances of the case, it was the verdict - a scavenger at work to recover the payment of compensation for the fourteen months of enforced idleness (!)
Cool, huh? It turns out that the charter company has not been told anything about alcohol. It would seem self-evident point, however, is not spelled out on paper. And without papers - you know. God knows who has advised enlightened plaintiff (or he had previously worked in the legal department of the company), but created an interesting precedent.
By the way, that's not all. The Court advised the amendment of the statute to prescribe the maximum permissible limits of alcohol in the blood of the workers working on the "unpleasant" positions. With that, it was easier to perceive reality.
Well, that is. You woke up in the morning in a bad mood. When I think that we should go shovel shit - I want to hang myself. A sotochku slapped - lo and behold - but life is getting better!