News, Smokers Need Not Apply: Is Hiring Ban Trend of the Future? (school, billion)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It's impossible to enforce employees to not smoke near their work place. If my co-worker comes into the cubicle smelling as if he just had a smoke break then I'll be very unhappy. I'll probably complain to my manager.
There are more non-smokers than smokers. Smokers lose, too bad.
How is this different than having a dress code? There's a reason why people can't wear G-Unit sweaters and Gold Chains as a bank teller.
From what I've seen a LOT of high achieving Type A personalities tend to smoke. I guess BO would be in that category.......hmmmm
Bottom line tobacco is a LEGAL substance and as long as you're not using it while IN the workplace, I don't think employers have any right to have those hiring practices in place.
I've also noticed the non smoking posters seem to have a pretty nasty attitude.
If a smoker isn't allowed to smoke on their break or their lunch, which is PERSONAL time, then should an employer allow the obese to wolf down donuts and whoppers on their breaks and lunch?
If employers are going to enforce healthy lifestyle choices during an employees personal time, that should include ALL UNHEALTHY lifestyle choices that could increase an employer's healthcare costs.
Breaks and lunches. Well it depends upon the company and how they pay.
For example I work a 12 hour shift. I am allowed 3 15 minute breaks (Paid)
and 1/2 lunch unpaid.
I am allowed to leave company property for my lunch. During lunch it is my time to spend as I see fit. The exception of course is if I decided to drink an alcoholic beaverage or do illegal drugs. I would fe fired for such things.
The company does provide smoking areas for smokers. Outside non-heated buildings. They do have lights.
Our health insurance. If you smoke you pay more, if your over weight, you pay more. If you have high cholesterol you pay more.
In short you are rewarded with a lower premium to be healthy.
I think sometimes the law is too blind. For example. As I said I work a 12 hour shift on concrete. 3 15 min breaks and 1/2 lunch. That is from the time you leave until you get back. Our breakroom is a 1 minute walk from the operating area. Yeah I timed myself.
To hire an obease person over age 50 for this job is a pipe dream. Especially if they never had to endure the long hours standing the entire time before. But the law says the company can not discrimnate right?
I think the real reason behind employers not wanting to hire smokers is because there are 50 applicants for every job opening in this economy. It's an employer's market. They can pick and choose who they want. Even those who smoke acknowledge that it's a disgusting, dirty habit and most wish they never started. If you're the HR dept. and you have 5 candidates equally qualified for a position and 3 of them are smokers you're probably gonna choose the non smokers. Especially when your health insurance rates will drop substantially when your staff are all certified non smokers.
Many of them are afraid to quit smoking because they fear they will gain weight and become over weight or obese. I think it's better they quit smoking and take that risk because they can always tackle the weight later after getting over the smoking for good. It takes time but it can be done. IMO there are much more health risks and problems with smoking than with being obese.
To my complete surprise I was actually told by two different women that one wanted to quit smoking but was afraid of gaining weight. I questioned her with "well are you a super model now" just be as careful as you can and don't let that stop you..you can always lose the weight later. Another woman said she wanted to quit but didn't want to leave the smoke friends she made during her smoke break...there's a lot of gossip and news about other employees she would miss out on if she quit smoking. I think these excuses are copouts but to them it's giving up something that's important to them.
If this idea to refuse to hire smokers is health related, which I doubt that it is, then what about reformed smokers?
Last edited by Lolipopbubbles; 12-04-2010 at 09:18 AM..
For about two decades, smokers have been pushed steadily out of the workplace, as lawmakers and employers have sought to minimize exposure to second-hand smoke.
Employers have confined smokers to designated areas, moved smoking areas outside buildings, and limited smoking breaks.
Excluding potential employees for other than good business reasons is a poor business practice. It's the same as excluding candidates because of race or religion. It narrows your pool of potential candidates and at some level, that will have a negative business impact.
Location: Jonquil City (aka Smyrna) Georgia- by Atlanta
16,259 posts, read 24,750,914 times
Reputation: 3587
Quote:
Originally Posted by annika08
What an attitude. Have you ever driven by a hospital and looked at the throng of hospital employees outside smoking? The high number of technicians, nurses, and *gasp*, sometimes doctors out there? Smokers can often be found in high-stress environments and not just "the trailer park". So much for your theory.
I don't know any MD that would smoke nor advise their patients to smoke. And most hospitals here in Georgia wisely prohibit employees from smoking anywhere on the property. If it were up to me, they would be prohibited from smoking anywhere at anytime- at least the new hires.
Location: Jonquil City (aka Smyrna) Georgia- by Atlanta
16,259 posts, read 24,750,914 times
Reputation: 3587
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadking2003
Excluding potential employees for other than good business reasons is a poor business practice. It's the same as excluding candidates because of race or religion. It narrows your pool of potential candidates and at some level, that will have a negative business impact.
No it won't. Excluding all kinds of addicts from your workforce- including nicotine addicts- means that your business will be far more productive, have fewer employees out sick and not have customers not coming back because your employees have horrible breath and foul odors. And you will probably pay less for health coverages.
Location: Jonquil City (aka Smyrna) Georgia- by Atlanta
16,259 posts, read 24,750,914 times
Reputation: 3587
Quote:
Originally Posted by Opyelie
From what I've seen a LOT of high achieving Type A personalities tend to smoke. I guess BO would be in that category.......hmmmm
Bottom line tobacco is a LEGAL substance and as long as you're not using it while IN the workplace, I don't think employers have any right to have those hiring practices in place.
I've also noticed the non smoking posters seem to have a pretty nasty attitude.
An employer has the right to have any hiring practices in place that they wish to put in place. In the USA we have the doctrine of Employment At Will. This means that the employer may choose employees on any basis they wish other than those which are exceptions under the law (race, national origin, sex, age, in some places, sexual orientation). That means that if you are left handed, the employer can say "I do not hire left handed people" or if you have blue eyes, the employer can say "I don't hire people with blue eyes because my dad had blue eyes and I hated him". Is that silly- of course - but it is LEGAL. When it comes to cigarette puffers, there is no doubt they drive up insurance cost, they miss more days due to illness and that they have offensive smells around them all the time. While the employer does not need to provide any justification for this policy, there is more than enough there.
Location: Jonquil City (aka Smyrna) Georgia- by Atlanta
16,259 posts, read 24,750,914 times
Reputation: 3587
Quote:
Originally Posted by cantthinkofaname
Many of them are afraid to quit smoking because they fear they will gain weight and become over weight or obese. I think it's better they quit smoking and take that risk because they can always tackle the weight later after getting over the smoking for good. It takes time but it can be done. IMO there are much more health risks and problems with smoking than with being obese.
To my complete surprise I was actually told by two different women that one wanted to quit smoking but was afraid of gaining weight. I questioned her with "well are you a super model now" just be as careful as you can and don't let that stop you..you can always lose the weight later. Another woman said she wanted to quit but didn't want to leave the smoke friends she made during her smoke break...there's a lot of gossip and news about other employees she would miss out on if she quit smoking. I think these excuses are copouts but to them it's giving up something that's important to them.
If this idea to refuse to hire smokers is health related, which I doubt that it is, then what about reformed smokers?
You won't become "obese". You will however gain weight and probably be somewhat overweight until your body adjust to the loss of nicotine. But you can diet that off. You cannot diet off cancer. It is not going to do you a bit of good to have the "perfect" body when you are laying there in bed throwing up vomit and gasping for your last breath while the family gathers to get their hands on what you leave behind and pick out your box and suit to bury you in.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
