mind blown about mom's job's smoke free policy (srs)

[craig84]

she told me about how they changed it six months ago. social worker at hospital in ohio. they give urine tests once a month at random for tobacco use. even one cigarette leaves cotinine (nicotine causes it to be produced in the body) in your system for 2-4 days. to be hired you have to sign a waiver. if you fail a test you are fired.

mind is blown that you can do something that is 100% legal, in your own home, and get fired for it. i don't smoke but i think it is bull **** that a place can fire you for something that is legal. contemplating emailing philip morris just to see what their lawyers have to say about it.

[JumpTheGun]

dont like it, dont work there. simple as that

fuk smokers

[Acal83]

dont like it, dont work there. simple as that

fuk smokers

Problem is what if it doesnt stop at smoking?

[craig84]

dont like it, dont work there. simple as that

fuk smokers

strong narrow mindedness and inability to see the actual issue with this. 19...

[E-Tank]

while i do this is awesome theyre tryna curb smoking, its pretty communist that theyre controlling an entire aspect of someone life outside of work

[BrostateGland]

in an "at-will" state, you can be fired for almost anything. for example:

listen to bieber? fired.
left handed? fired.
watch american idol? fired.

totally legit.

the only limits are things like racial discrimination, etc.

what are the checks on this? if an employer places draconian, unfair restrictions on who can work for them, they won't attract good employees, and will go out of business.

EDIT: because employers pick up the tab for medical insurance, they can negotiate a lower rate if they can guarantee that their employees aren't smokers. this is why they have a no-smoking policy.

[craig84]

while i do this is awesome theyre tryna curb smoking, its pretty communist that theyre controlling an entire aspect of someone life outside of work

i know. i don't understand the legality of how they can do this. not on the premises i can understand. i get smoke free in that aspect because a job can tell you what you can and cannot do AT work. i do not understand how they can tell you what you can do in your own home. it is legal, it is your own home, how do they have say?

people are always complaining about our civil liberties being trampled and i usually don't see it, at all. this though is a bit crazy. what is next?

in an "at-will" state, you can be fired for almost anything. for example:

listen to bieber? fired.
left handed? fired.
watch american idol? fired.

totally legit.

the only limits are things like racial discrimination, etc.

what are the checks on this? if an employer places draconian, unfair restrictions on who can work for them, they won't attract good employees, and will go out of business.

this is a legit hospital. big hospital. my mom makes a little over 60k a year. economy is **** and so it isn't like workers who want to smoke can just leave willy nilly and find work the next day.

[Dave P]

asking for a lawsuit/10



Stupid policy is stupid....unless the job somehow involves something that can be undermined by someone smoking cigarettes

[Dan916]

what the fawk that has to be illegal.. id contact people about that.

[YIAMSOMEBODY]

Saw something like this on a 60 Minutes special a few years back. Sone guy had a company and his policy was the same: "Work for me, you're not gonna smoke or do drugs".

Mirin' his outlook.....

[tsdub86]

At-will state. Can be fired or quit for any reason...Including smoking

[NotTyler]

But she works there by choice.

I see your point, but you have to understand that it isn't her business. She works for someone else, and that person has the right to hire and/or fire who they see fit to work there.

[craig84]

asking for a lawsuit/10



Stupid policy is stupid....unless the job somehow involves something that can be undermined by someone smoking cigarettes

i'm about to call philip morris and inquire about this. i don't smoke but i think this is flat out wrong.

But she works there by choice.

I see your point, but you have to understand that it isn't her business. She works for someone else, and that person has the right to hire and/or fire who they see fit to work there.

smoking at home, in my living room, has zero effect on anything to do with the job. how is that even legal to get fired for? wtf are wrongful termination laws all about then?

[BrotatoChip]

lots of people get fired for continuing to smoke

companies that provide healthcare don't want to accept high-liability applicants just like insurance companies don't. Smokers have more health problems than non-smokers, dealwithit.jpg

[getout87]

It's all about money, for insurance costs specifically.

[Dave P]

At-will state. Can be fired or quit for any reason...Including smoking

Common misconception about "At-will".


There are still tons of terminations that are considered illegal.


I can't fire someone for being black for example.





I can easily see a discrimination case being brought over something like this and even if they don't win it would still cost the company tons of money to fight.

[rdog3]

I never touch a cigarette at work(6-9 hours), but when I'm at home or out getting yucky and want a cig let me enjoy it. Fuk, where is my freedom man?

[tsdub86]

Common misconception about "At-will".


There are still tons of terminations that are considered illegal.


I can't fire someone for being black for example.

Obvoiusly anything protected by the federal and/or state governments is excluded. Smokers are not a protected group lol.

[BrostateGland]

this has nothing to do with civil liberties guise

this is a contract between employer (hospital) and employee (social worker)

the hospital wants to save money on health insurance, and they can do so by implementing this policy. if the employees don't like it, they can work elsewhere.

[NotTyler]

I can't fire someone for being black for example.

Being black isn't a choice, smoking is.

[Biblical_Death]

In curious now myself.. Email them and report back to us. I'm going to bookmark this so do it *******!

[0reppower]

Nothing has to be proved. Nobody is forcing you to take the job and stop smoking. Its their company and their policy.
That's like suing a company because you don't like their return and exchange policy. Just don't buy there and you are doing your part.

[Dave P]

Being black isn't a choice, smoking is.

Would you have felt better if I had said firing someone for being a veteran?







I'm not saying I'm against the policy...I just think its a bad business decision that exposes you to lawsuits and problems you don't need to expose yourself to.

[BDMizzle]

what it do, im andrew

[NotTyler]

What about the rights of the company?

Are you saying it shouldn't be able to pick and choose the people it hires? As long as they don't discriminate against race / sex / religion I see no issue in this.

[VeinyPenor]

My work is the same. It is a great idea. I should not have it increased insurance premiums due to idiots who smoke. It's to save money in the long run

[craig84]

this has nothing to do with civil liberties guise

this is a contract between employer (hospital) and employee (social worker)

the hospital wants to save money on health insurance, and they can do so by implementing this policy. if the employees don't like it, they can work elsewhere.

good we got to this point. my mother has been working there for years. i asked about how being grandfathered in worked with this. she said that people who worked there either had to quit smoking and sign the contract or they were told they would be fired. a contract is a contract. that i understand. it is the people who have been working there, who smoke, who are told to quit and sign a contract or they would be fired. that is what i'm questioning.

[Ricky116]

So you think it'd be OK if your poster-boy for your gay-health magazine promoting health for gays was publicly seen to be a chain smoker?

It's the same principle, you can't promote health (working in a hospital) whilst simultaneously doing something that harms you, and expect to be taken seriously. When you are employed by a company, you represent that company. Why is it any different to firing people "for bringing the company into disrepute" which is a common condition in employment contracts.

It'd be like employing a self-harmer to teach self-harmers not to self harm.

[tsdub86]

Would you have felt better if I had said firing someone for being a veteran?







I'm not saying I'm against the policy...I just think its a bad business decision that exposes you to lawsuits and problems you don't need to expose yourself to.

This exposes the company to 0 lawsuits. A company can discriminate on anything that isn't a protected group. Ex: Religion, Race, Sex, Disablity, etc. Try learning some business/employment law brah.

[NotTyler]

Would you have felt better if I had said firing someone for being a veteran?

I'm not saying I'm against the policy...I just think its a bad business decision that exposes you to lawsuits and problems you don't need to expose yourself to.

I see your point, and yes I think firing someone for being a veteran is a much better example.

I'm not saying it is a good policy, but i think that the employer has the right to hire and fire who they please.