>If you think that nobody would be fired for refusing to work in unsafe conditions and nobody would be fired for not drinking, you're still agreeing that the si

>If you think that nobody would be fired for refusing to work in unsafe conditions and nobody would be fired for not drinking, you're still agreeing that the situations are similar... I'm absolutely not. One is being given a 'duty' of some sort to do, as part of your job, but legitimately refusing on safety grounds. How is that in any way similar to not participating in a drinking contest down the pub, on a works piss-up? And if, instead of staggering out the pub and going on his arse, this eejit and his pissed-up mates had decided to drunkenly kick the crap out of some innocent passer-by, that would have been excusable too, because he only joined in to avoid losing 'social credit' with his workmates?