U-haul says no to smokers looking for jobs

[hotkarl]

Originally Posted by Open-D

Thank you for that information. However, the difference is that when 1 person eats a potentially-harmless food, nobody else is exposed to it, and it is a rare food indeed that has the disgusting stench of burning tobacco.

There are so many other things people are exposed to on a regular basis that make cigarette smoke seem like mother's milk.
It's all brain washing and conditioning.
The CO from vehicles, your microwave, your drinking water in some cases, exhaust from hvac systems etc etc etc...We breathe crap like that all day long every day and nobody thinks twice about it.

The smell of smoke is subjective.
I don’t smoke, but the smell does not bother me unless it's extreme like when you go to someones house who is a lifelong chain smoker that never opens the windows.
The smell of McDonalds and Indian food repulse me though. I smell that crap and I become nauseous, but that's just me.
While we're at it, a study showed fast food fries and diet soda are worse for you than cigarette smoke.

For the most part, exposure to cigarette smoke is minimal for the average person unless you live with a smoker.
The tinfoil hatters will have you believe if you walk past someone smoking in the street you'll immediately catch a case of cancer.

The other bizzaro thing is that the government constantly tells you how bad smoking is yet they do not ban it. They ban all kinds of other stupid things but not tobacco. Or alcohol for that matter. We all know why.

Another funny thing, I know at least a dozen pot smokers that blaze away but will make a stink if you light up a butt. I've called them out on it and they make so many ridiculous excuses as to why "it's different".

Rant over.

[2mares]

Originally Posted by mikeyyc

Personally, I have a problem with it. I don't smoke, but why should someone be punished for doing something completely legal? You can make the workplace non-smoking, there are tons of non-smoking bylaws and restrictions, but at the end of the day, it's still legal. If we want smoking to go away, make it illegal like other drugs. To ban someone from working based on what they do in their off hours is a bad precedent to take.

Exactly, as many are already. Problem solved.

But their argument is suppose to be for healthier employees and I assume lower health insurance rates. So why focus on smokers. Why not require employees to maintain a certain weight, no pre-existing medical conditions, no one over 50?

[Fuele]

Originally Posted by 2mares

Exactly, as many are already. Problem solved.

But their argument is suppose to be for healthier employees and I assume lower health insurance rates. So why focus on smokers. Why not require employees to maintain a certain weight, no pre-existing medical conditions, no one over 50?

That is already happening with social medicine. The County of Hertfordshire England has banned “ access to routine, or non- urgent surgery “ under the National Health Service until patients “ improve their health “
Don’t tell this to smokers and the obese who support Bernie.

[GotHereQuickAsICould]

So I stopped by UHaul to pick up some boxes this morning.

There were two young men behind the counter and two apparently hanging out. Perhaps friends. Perhaps employees who were not on duty at the moment.

All needed a bath, a shave, a couple decent meals, and a dental plan.

From the looks of things, smoking was the least of their vices.

[r small]

Originally Posted by GotHereQuickAsICould

So I stopped by UHaul to pick up some boxes this morning.

There were two young men behind the counter and two apparently hanging out. Perhaps friends. Perhaps employees who were not on duty at the moment.

All needed a bath, a shave, a couple decent meals, and a dental plan.

From the looks of things, smoking was the least of their vices.

Meth is hard on the teeth.

[GhostOfAndrewJackson]

I think many of are slightly confused. There is U-Haul the corporation that has a number of LOBs and U-Haul dealerships and U-Haul franchises. This only impacts U-Haul the corporation. When you rent a trailer, if it is housed with another business that is likely a franchise or possibly dealership. The dealerships and franchises are independent businesses that are in essence buying the right to use, for a limited period of time, the right to use the trademarks and tradenames owned by U-Haul corporation but they are not U-Haul corporation. The odds are when you rent a trailer you are not dealing with U_haul but a dealership that is independently owned, operated, and has its own benefit program(or not) unrelated to corporate.