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.
But there is still some question as to whether or not being overweight or obese is a medical condition, and therefore protected, or a choice. I don't know of anyone who uses tobacco as a result of a medical condition or a side effect of prescription medication. Yes, there are people who are overweight strictly because of their choices. But there are also people who are overweight as a result of medical conditions such as hypothyroidism, PCOS, pituitary tumor or dysfunction, etc. or medications such as steroids and epilepsy medication. It's too complicated for employers to sort out the reasons for each overweight/obese person, not to mention it's probably a HIPAA violation.
The vast majority of the overweight do not have a medical condition, they just choose not to reign in their bad eating habits.
As far as HIPAA is concerned, providing documentation proving a medical condition for being overweight would be no more of a violation or any more complicated than bringing in a doctor's excuse for missing work.
The vast majority of the overweight do not have a medical condition, they just choose not to reign in their bad eating habits.
As far as HIPAA is concerned, providing documentation proving a medical condition for being overweight would be no more of a violation or any more complicated than bringing in a doctor's excuse for missing work.
Its not. that. simple.
In any case, at my company you do pay more for health insurance if you're overweight. If you get a Doc to write you an exception form you can get it waived.
In any case, at my company you do pay more for health insurance if you're overweight. If you get a Doc to write you an exception form you can get it waived.
How does one prove their weight?
I'm just curious as I'm often labeled as overweight; however, it's due to muscle mass and not fat. 6'1" 220lbs ....would I be considered overweight?
The vast majority of the overweight do not have a medical condition, they just choose not to reign in their bad eating habits.
As far as HIPAA is concerned, providing documentation proving a medical condition for being overweight would be no more of a violation or any more complicated than bringing in a doctor's excuse for missing work.
I agree that the vast majority of people who are overweight do not have a medical condition. However, potential employers are prohibited from asking about medical conditions. They can only verify that the applicant is able to perform the job requirements. Being overweight does not preclude most people from doing most white collar jobs. But asking about medical conditions is prohibited.
Once you are hired, employers can require a doctor's note for certain absences. These notes are not required to disclose your malady. So a note saying you were under the are of Dr. John Doe is all that's required. It does not need to indicate why you were under the care of Dr. John Doe. And HIPAA prevents employers from asking. They just need a doctor's release stating you are cleared to return to work.
I agree that the vast majority of people who are overweight do not have a medical condition. However, potential employers are prohibited from asking about medical conditions. They can only verify that the applicant is able to perform the job requirements. Being overweight does not preclude most people from doing most white collar jobs. But asking about medical conditions is prohibited.
Once you are hired, employers can require a doctor's note for certain absences. These notes are not required to disclose your malady. So a note saying you were under the are of Dr. John Doe is all that's required. It does not need to indicate why you were under the care of Dr. John Doe. And HIPAA prevents employers from asking. They just need a doctor's release stating you are cleared to return to work.
WE get a 900 end of year bonus if we meet our health goals, and pay less on insurance the following year from what i was told. I am still waiting on my FTB kick in.
But to be honest, pre existing issues should never be a factor for anything, unless it limits your job ability. If i want a stand desk, i have to have dr note or wait for next round of approval for expenditures in office equipment.
We have 2-3 pack day smokers here and i have to pick up their slack and reach out to some higher up management to do something about it soon. Out of 8 hours, they might do 2-3 hours of work, rest of the time smoking, and didnt realize it takes you 15-30 mins to huff and puff.
I have a friend who has a Heart condition. He doesnt smoke nor he is any overweight. But his Medical bills over a period of year are more then any smoker or overweight person.
Denying opportunity to obese / smoker and employing a thin heart patient is ridiculous if overall Insurance costs are considered.
I dont smoke, dip or do any of that nasty stuff, but looking in the ads and notice alot of Non Tobacco users apply only. I get it and agree with it, as we got smokers were i am, and breaks for them is like every 45 mins, so they can have their fix, mean while i cant take break till break time, but smokers are allowed? So back to basic, is this discriminatory?
Yes, it's discriminatory.
But it's not illegal discrimination.
Non-smokers are not a protected class under the law.
I suspect that your employers are smokers. Otherwise they wouldn't stand for that nonsense.
I'm retired now, but I worked for over 40 yrs in various industries - pvt and public sectors.
I've NEVER known of any place that allowed smokers to take extra breaks. People could smoke on their regular breaks, but extra breaks every 45 minutes or whatever ? - no. "Smoke breaks" WTH? If managers allow this then they aren't doing their jobs. Whether those managers smoke or not is irrelevant.
What would be interesting is to see how much time people waste standing around gossiping, on personal calls, and doing personal things on their computers and phones. That exceeds smoke breaks by far.
I also disagree with the statement "people don't care if someone smokes in their personal life". Many people DO care - a lot.
Most employers in the healthcare sector perform pre-employment drug testing and many refuse to employ anybody who tests positive for nicotine. My particular employer put in a ban on hiring anybody who used any nicotine-containing products in the early 2010s. They grandfathered existing users in, but charge them about four times as much for health insurance unless they quit and have a negative urine drug test to prove it. All employees are subject to a random urine test to prove compliance with this, so you can't quit for a week when you apply for the job, have a negative urine test, and then restart smoking/dipping/etc.
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.
WTH? If managers allow this then they aren't doing their jobs. Whether those managers smoke or not is irrelevant.
