More Smoking News: Quit or Lose Your Job

[Kevin]

Originally posted by 33girl
Yes. I would like you to try saying to someone "we won't hire you because you eat pork rinds for breakfast and never exercise and require a troop of Boy Scouts to roll you from side to side."

Your company would be boycotted so fast - by EVERYONE, not just obese people - your head would spin.

I don't know if that would happen. Why would you get in trouble for encouraging your employees to live a healthy lifestyle?

The obese are discriminated against all the time. What.. you don't think appearance is a major factor in many hiring decisions?

[Tom Earp]

Ah, Rudey, no it is not the same, it is called % of of Net. Sure, one can raise the price but doesnt that mean that one has to be comepetive with those in the Immediate area?

The % of Profit lowers because of the cost.


33girl, do not mess with My Pork Skins!

Plain, use Hot Sauce.

Also Get BBQ and Hot when I can get them!!!!!

Not Dietetic are they?

Hell anything Good is not good for You!

[Tom Earp]

Soilent Green!

I Dont Eat Happy Bugers, Fries, cant afford them!

Unfortuneatly Brains dont come into play anymore!

[SissyC0109]

Originally posted by ktsnake
The obese are discriminated against all the time. What.. you don't think appearance is a major factor in many hiring decisions?

Of course the obese are discriminated against. And if they can prove prejudice it's often taken to court. You think it hasn't happened?

[KSig RC]

Originally posted by 33girl
Not lung cancer, not emphysema - OBESITY and conditions stemming from it like heart disease. And this is in areas where lots of people smoke.

Saying that heart disease is obesity-related, but not smoking-related, is insane.

While cigarettes are also a short-term appetite suppressant, smoking has also been shown to contribute to other things (high blood pressure, COPD, etc) that have elements related to obesity. Many also gain weight upon onset of these elements of poor health.

-RC
--It's all related, is what I'm saying, and only one is able to be remedied through company policy

[kddani]

There's also quite a few of smokers who are obese, and a lot of times it is hard to separate which causes what disease, most of the time they compound and both contribute.

Also, cigarettes are ALWAYS something that someone chooses to do. Obesity MAY sometimes be caused by medical conditions. So discriminating against someone for something they CHOSE to do is a lot different than discriminating against someone for something they don't have control over (*disclaimer, i'm saying SOME, not all or most, obesity is due to disease, so let's not start that debate)

As to cigs, Rudey's right, the taxes aren't coming out of the storeowner's pocket. Of course, as a storeowner, someone like Tom would be against anything that limits smokers. Cigarettes are a cashcow. It's not a frivolous thing, it's something that smokers "need" every day and no matter how high the prices, many keep smoking. Storeowners are happy to exploit that addiction as it makes their pockets fat.

Also, alcohol doesn't kill people, unless it is abused. All of those studies that say a glass of red wine is good for you. There's nothing out there to show that a cigarette a day is good for you in any way, shape or form. The same with fatty foods- in small quantities, they won't hurt you. When you eat like 15 McDonalds quarterpounders a week with a large fry, yeah, that's gonna hurt. Again, cigarettes in small quantities still cause damage.

I feel for smokers, because I know they have an addiction, but at the same time, there are so many ways to quit- products, support groups, etc. etc. So I'm really not bothered by this regulation very much. Some of my coworkers are heavy smokers... I think they're awesome people, but I can't stand to be around them sometimes because of the smell. An air filtering system had to be purchased for one of our (nonsmoking) employees who has severe allergies. And, as others have noted, the frequent smoke breaks take away from productivity, and non-smokers (in most workplaces) don't get the same type of break.

[Kevin]

Originally posted by SissyC0109
Of course the obese are discriminated against. And if they can prove prejudice it's often taken to court. You think it hasn't happened?

They would have probably lost. There is some precedent where the fact that an individual is fat relates to some health condition that they don't control, but if you simply choose to eat a 12-piece KFC for dinner every night, you deserve what you get.

There is a list of legal precedent showing pretty split authority on the issue (from the National Association to Advance Fat Acceptance):

http://www.naafa.org/info/legal/court.html

Anytime an employer discloses the reason he/she does not hire someone, they are asking for a lawsuit.. In some of these cases, they won, in some they lost. The company is stupid for saying anything in the first place though.

[AGDee]

Originally posted by ktsnake
Dangerous precedent? As an employer, I would prefer healthy employees who don't have to call in sick because of the recurring upper respiratory infections that they keep getting due to smoking. I'd prefer not to have to pay their higher healthcare costs, It would annoy me to see them taking 15 minute breaks every 30 minutes, and I don't like the smell.

I think this company has every right to select their employees based on whatever criteria as long as it's not illegal discrimination (and cigarette smokers are not a protected class by any stretch).

If an employee is using more than their allotted sick days and haven't filed FMLA papers, then you fire them. I can't remember the last time I had an upper respiratory infection. If employees take more than their allotted breaks (including their GC time at work), you fire them. If you can't afford their healthcare costs, you make them pay more of them. You lump all smokers into one category.

The precedent is that what you do in your free time, away from work, if it doesn't affect your work, should not be your employer's business and it's dangerous to allow them to dictate that. It started with random drug testing. Now it's moving to cigarettes. At least the drugs they test for are illegal. Smoking isn't.

My brother is a thin, non-smoker who exercises daily. He is also on medication for high blood pressure and high cholesterol and was rejected by the Air Force because of his blood pressure. He has the healthiest lifestyle of anybody I know but genetics gave him these issues. It would be a scary world if he couldn't get a job because of this. Where and how do you draw the line?

[Rudey]

I think they should end the ban on drugs. People can take cocaine breaks, drop acid in the mail room, smoke ganja on their breaks and shoot up some heroin during the group bonding exercises.

-Rudey

[Kevin]

Originally posted by AGDee
If an employee is using more than their allotted sick days and haven't filed FMLA papers, then you fire them. I can't remember the last time I had an upper respiratory infection. If employees take more than their allotted breaks (including their GC time at work), you fire them. If you can't afford their healthcare costs, you make them pay more of them. You lump all smokers into one category.

The precedent is that what you do in your free time, away from work, if it doesn't affect your work, should not be your employer's business and it's dangerous to allow them to dictate that. It started with random drug testing. Now it's moving to cigarettes. At least the drugs they test for are illegal. Smoking isn't.

My brother is a thin, non-smoker who exercises daily. He is also on medication for high blood pressure and high cholesterol and was rejected by the Air Force because of his blood pressure. He has the healthiest lifestyle of anybody I know but genetics gave him these issues. It would be a scary world if he couldn't get a job because of this. Where and how do you draw the line?

From reading those cases on that fat peoples' advocacy group, the courts seem to draw the line at conditions caused by the individual's own actions and conditions caused by injuries, illnesses, etc.

So if I'm fat because my favorite midnight snack is two big mac supersize combos, I might be rightfully discriminated against. If I choose to continue smoking, again, I might be rightly discriminated against. If I'm overweight due to diabetes, some sort of glandular condition, etc. not my fault, and I think the ADA might even protect me.

The ADA doesn't cover the Air Force, but if a private employer discriminates against him due to his high blood pressure, he may have a good lawsuit.

[Coramoor]

Just more of big brother trying to tell me what I can do with my own body.

I wonder how the pro-choice people feel about this. It's the same thing. The gov't telling you what you can do on your own time.

It's funny that all these liberal ass cities and universities are placing a ban on cigs and yet pretty much turn a blind eye to people smoking weed. I don't get how all the hippies against big tabacco companies are against cigs...while they are smoking a blunt in the bathroom during lunch.

[Tom Earp]

Is Tobacco a Cash Cow? Yes it is to Our Federal, State and Local Govts.

Yes it is.!!!!!

Now, who will pay all of the taxes from a leagal Product when I and Thousands of others are out of work and Business. Who will pay for them sitting idle!

Guess Who Missy? You!

If You personally dont want to smoke, then dont! If You do not want to go somewhere People do, dont.

Do not take the high and mighty road and tromp on My Freedoms of what I wish to do.

Are You or anyone going to pay My way when I am out of business and have not work, or pay My people who work for Me and the Hundreds of Wholesalers, Manufacturers, Truck Drivers, ETC!

Coramoor, You are so right On!

How many more Rights am I/we I going to lose?

I would get a Lawyer over The Fact that I now have to buy from a Wholesaler with Higher Prices because an Appellate Judge Couldnt make a Decision and it may now go to The Supremee Court. It is thier decision to hear it, but who are they? Black Robed Lawyers!

[AOIIalum]

Originally posted by aephi alum
Is the company helping employees find quit-smoking resources, or is it just hanging them out to dry?

Yes, the company is providing smoking cessation resources to those employees who need them. Scotts also opened a new health and fitness center for employees in Marysville earlier this month.

More info was in the full article in the Columbus Dispatch:
http://shop.dispatch.com/newsarchive...937:7:2&md=dir

(registration required, but no charge to read the article)

[AGDee]

I found this on the CDC web site while looking for something else and thought of this thread. I'd suggest reading the whole article, it's pretty interesting. Perhaps they'll end up banning people who exercise eventually too...

More than 10,000 people receive treatment in the nation’s emergency departments (ED) each day for injuries sustained in SRE activities. At least one of every five ED visits for an injury results from participation in sports or recreation. In 1999, Americans made an estimated 1.5 million ED visits for injuries sustained while playing basketball, baseball, softball, football, or soccer. Approximately 715,000 sports and recreation injuries occur each year in school settings alone.


For example, in the U.S., anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) knee injuries are usually sports related, and the vast majority occur in active, healthy 15- to 24-year-olds. ACL rupture can be debilitating in the short term, preventing continued physical activity. The cost of ACL reconstruction alone, not including initial evaluation or rehabilitation, is just under $1 billion per year in the U.S.


the link

[kddani]

Originally posted by AGDee
I found this on the CDC web site while looking for something else and thought of this thread. I'd suggest reading the whole article, it's pretty interesting. Perhaps they'll end up banning people who exercise eventually too...

More than 10,000 people receive treatment in the nation’s emergency departments (ED) each day for injuries sustained in SRE activities. At least one of every five ED visits for an injury results from participation in sports or recreation. In 1999, Americans made an estimated 1.5 million ED visits for injuries sustained while playing basketball, baseball, softball, football, or soccer. Approximately 715,000 sports and recreation injuries occur each year in school settings alone.


For example, in the U.S., anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) knee injuries are usually sports related, and the vast majority occur in active, healthy 15- to 24-year-olds. ACL rupture can be debilitating in the short term, preventing continued physical activity. The cost of ACL reconstruction alone, not including initial evaluation or rehabilitation, is just under $1 billion per year in the U.S.


the link

What does that have to do with smoking? Answer: nothing.

Exercise has enormous health benefits. Smoking does not have ANY. Exercise does not hurt anyone else, smoking does. Exercise is not guaranteed to hurt you, smoking is. Exercise does not cause cancer. Smoking does.

Any injury from exercise is not going to kill you (with the exception for the odd freak accident). Injuries/illnesses from smoking have a very high chance of killing you.