Again, you're implying that being an alcoholic means you're posing an unnecessary safety risk, and that non-alcoholics don't pose comparable risks. If you read the topic, you'll see that we've already had this debate. I'll repeat the most important points for your convenience:
1) A non-alcoholic could also get drunk and get behind the wheel. That's also an "unnecessary safety risk."
2) The driver in question was apparently working for five years without incident, so even if he was posing a risk, it didn't exactly show in his output at work. Which is all that should matter. Like Igloo said, what the truck driver does off the clock is none of the employer's business.
Man, you probably think it's unfair that insurers charge different rates to different people, don't you.
--
"All video games being free is a human right." -Vlado [Evil Republican]
Play Der Langrisser.