|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 658
All Pro
|
OP
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 658 |
Researchers: Barring smokers from employment isn't rightLos Angeles Times 11:27 PM EST, January 21, 2009 Smoking bans in public buildings, workplaces, even at some outdoor venues are now commonplace. And becoming more common is the practice of barring smokers from employment. But this approach is unfair and may have unintended consequences that do more harm than good, say researchers in an essay published Wednesday in the journal Tobacco Control. Policies prohibiting the hiring of smokers have gained popularity in the past year, a co-author of the report, Dr. Michael Siegel, said in an interview Wednesday. One U.S. company, for example, has stopped hiring smokers, has made smoking outside the workplace grounds for firing and has extended its smoking ban to employees' spouses. Siegel, a professor at Boston University School of Public Health, is a tobacco-control advocate. But he and co-author Brian Houle, of the University of Washington, fear that a widespread adoption of such policies might make smokers nearly unemployable, cause them to lose their health insurance and affect their health and that of their families. Moreover, they say, refusing to hire smokers is discriminatory and might lead to the adoption of other selective employment practices, such as not hiring people who are overweight or who have high cholesterol levels. "People have thought about the positive benefits of these programs," such as the fact that they might reduce absenteeism and increase productivity, Siegel says. "But we don't think people have thought through the negative consequences. We're looking at this from a broader public health perspective." Tobacco-control advocates are divided over the merits of barring smokers from the workplace. Some fear that speaking out against the employment bans would get them branded as "traitors to the cause," Siegel said. "Smoking is a very powerful addiction," he said. "Tobacco-control practitioners have naturally become very frustrated that it's so difficult to get people to quit. The problem is that we can't let that frustration cloud our vision about what is appropriate and what is not appropriate. This represents employment discrimination. And, I believe, from a public health perspective, we need to shun that." Employers typically favor positive approaches to encourage healthy employee behavior, such as free smoking-cessation classes. But Siegel predicts that workplace bans will become more popular as employers look for every approach to cut health-care costs. About half of all states have laws that protect employees from being fired or not hired because they smoke. But other states have no such protections. web page
Thomas - The Tank Engine
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,086
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,086 |
As someone that has put up with 2nd hand smoke for years, I'm all for doing whatever to get rid of smokers - bars, work places, whatever. Smoke at home on your own time.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,955
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,955 |
And, jobs? Nice. 
#gmstrong #gmlapdance
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,959
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,959 |
Sorry,,, I know it sounds mean and two years and 3 months ago I wouldn't have felt this way..
But I was a 4 pack a day smoker... got hypnosis, quit in one day and haven't looked back.
For the last two years, I've had to put up with my wife smoking in the house... finally, she was told by the doctor to quit before her hip replacement surgery (feb 10th).... so she went to hypnosis and it's been 3 weeks now.
As much as I understand the urge to smoke and the addiction, I'm all for stopping everyone from smoking everywhere..
I feel bad saying it, but believe me, after 2 years, I feel better.. and it is my hope that everyone that smokes gets the message.. they will feel better also..
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367 |
Well, if it's about health concerns then you better get busy banning lots and lots of stuff. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 7,234
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 7,234 |
I'm all for it too. You smoke? Tough, you don't work here. I smoked for 15 years. Not only does second hand smoke now drive me nuts, just the smell of someone's clothes right after they smoke is enough to turn my stomach. Nasty. Also, unless a majority of smokers in the workplace aren't like me, I'm thinking a majority are more focused on their next smoke break when things get busy or hectic than they are on their work. But like I said, maybe I was in the minority there.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,955
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,955 |
This article really isn't about how bad smoking is for you. It's about a person not getting a job because they are a smoker. If that's okay with people, then this world has turned into a very sad place more quickly than I thought.
#gmstrong #gmlapdance
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 7,234
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 7,234 |
Quote:
Well, if it's about health concerns then you better get busy banning lots and lots of stuff.
Sure, if they affect coworkers and the company.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367 |
If they aren't smoking in the workplace, please tell me how that affects you.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,955
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,955 |
Here we go. The old, tired, "smokers cost more" argument. And, god forbid someone be offended by an odor. Guess what, I don't like your cologne, it stinks and offends me...should you be forced to stop wearing it? You should with your reasoning.
#gmstrong #gmlapdance
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,431
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,431 |
Quote:
As someone that has put up with 2nd hand smoke for years, I'm all for doing whatever to get rid of smokers - bars, work places, whatever.
Right on !! After we get rid of them the number one priority should be the banning of all fast food joints and fat people . They are a drain on an already over burdened medical field and if you are overwieght you should be denied employment or at the very least you should be denied medical insurance coverage . If you want to over eat or eat bad foods then you assume responsibility for those actions . See what a wonderful world we could have ?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,405
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,405 |
Quote:
This article really isn't about how bad smoking is for you. It's about a person not getting a job because they are a smoker. If that's okay with people, then this world has turned into a very sad place more quickly than I thought.
Its funny...can't work somewhere because you are a smoker...I wonder how many of the non-smoking employees have criminal records?
"My signature line goes here."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,836
Steeler
|
|
Steeler
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,836 |
How would the employer even know if an employee smokes is my question...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 7,234
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 7,234 |
Quote:
Here we go. The old, tired, "smokers cost more" argument. And, god forbid someone be offended by an odor. Guess what, I don't like your cologne, it stinks and offends me...should you be forced to stop wearing it? You should with your reasoning.
If it offends coworkers. Why not?
I had a coworker back in college who was sent home because it was obvious from the smell that he hadn't bathed. In a while. Was that wrong?
I've driven this off topic though. It's not about how existing employees smell or what they do during break, its about not hiring them in the first place because they smoke.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,955
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,955 |
Well, I guess people are honest and say "yes, I smoke, but I don't have to smoke on campus, I can wait". If I ever have a check box to mark as to whether I smoke or not, I'm going to mark "no". That'll teach 'em. I'm very thankful that I own my own business where I can walk outside, have a quick smoke, air off, and head back in. I do try to steer clear of people for a few minutes afterward because I know fresh smoke stinks. But, what should I do about my employee who has musty smelling sneakers? Talk about a 100% of the time offensive smell! 
#gmstrong #gmlapdance
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,959
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,959 |
Quote:
Well, if it's about health concerns then you better get busy banning lots and lots of stuff.
I vowed that when I quit, I woudn't become one of "THOSE" ex smokers that bugged everyone to quit.
I just couldn't, after a while, keep my vow. at first it didn't bother me.. but man it drives me nuts now.
If I'm sitting in a bar (rare for me these days) and someone is sitting next to me then goes out for a smoke.. then they come back in, it stinks... I mean it stinks badly.. Never in a million years did I think it would bother me.
But it does.
I guess I can't help feeling the way I do. I put up with it with my wife for 2+ years,,,, fortunately, she was not a heavy smoker.... maybe a pack a day at most. but still, it really bugged me.
So all your arguments aside, and I'm not saying you guys are all wrong or anything, but from my perspective, smokers are people I don't really want to be around...
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,955
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,955 |
Quote:
It's not about how existing employees smell or what they do during break, its about not hiring them in the first place because they smoke.
So, that's okay with you...to not hire someone because they smoke on their own time? And, really, it should be about existing employees and how they smell, or the person who has a few drinks every night after work. What's fair is fair.
#gmstrong #gmlapdance
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 7,234
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 7,234 |
Quote:
After we get rid of them the number one priority should be the banning of all fast food joints and fat people . They are a drain on an already over burdened medical field and if you are overwieght you should be denied employment or at the very least you should be denied medical insurance coverage . If you want to over eat or eat bad foods then you assume responsibility for those actions . See what a wonderful world we could have ?
Well, we're only talking about the work place. Or at least I thought so. If you consume too much fast food but still do a good job, then you should be fine. If you can no longer make it up a flight of stairs or your butt gets too wide for the office chairs, then there's a problem.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,955
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,955 |
Quote:
So all your arguments aside, and I'm not saying you guys are all wrong or anything, but from my perspective, smokers are people I don't really want to be around...
That's what used to make America great -- the freedom of choice.
#gmstrong #gmlapdance
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,431
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,431 |
I'm assuming companies don't want to hire smokers because they know that odds are in favor of smokers costing them money at some point in time due to illnesses associated with the habit . I simply took it to the next logical step of including fat people . We can't discriminate about our desciminatory practices or can we ?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 809
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 809 |
Im sorry but being a smoker is not a protected class in most states, and rightfully so. Im even for the nicotine drug tests that some employers have started, claiming that the cost of health insurance is higher when employees smoke. If thats a problem for you, then move to Kentucky where it is a protected class.
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/captainphil/browns bills sig 5.jpg) When it gets cold and snows and the wind blows, you gotta be able to run the ball. - TR
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,431
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,431 |
Quote:
That's what used to make America great -- the freedom of choice.
As long as you only choose to do what the 'majority' wants you to do .
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367 |
My God, the nannies are never going to stop their tirade, it's pathetic.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,836
Steeler
|
|
Steeler
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,836 |
Quote:
Im even for the nicotine drug tests that some employers have started
Wow, they actually have those now? Holy smoke! 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,639
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,639 |
Quote:
I don't like your cologne, it stinks and offends me...should you be forced to stop wearing it?
Man I wish some should, Some of these people I work with take a bath in it I swear. 
Eat it Phil...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367 |
Yep, remember people saying when all this started that they were going to go after what people did in the privacy of their own homes and people laughed at them? Keep laughing folks, the do-gooders and nannies aren't happy unless they are controlling everything you do.....
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,678
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,678 |
Quote:
How would the employer even know if an employee smokes is my question...
Pre-screening when they make you pee in a cup.
This is crazy and very scary the way some people think.
I wish we could ban stupid people from having children..
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong ![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/small-gator-chomp.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,836
Steeler
|
|
Steeler
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,836 |
j/c Just so I have this straight....let's say Mary has worked at a company for 10 years and suddenly decides to take up smoking. Is she going to get canned because she comes to work smelling like smoke? What if she doesn't actually smoke, but rather she lives with a heavy smoker, which is why her clothes always smell? Does her employer say "Mary, we've noticed recently that you smell like smoke. You need to submit to a nicotine test now". And, a further question to ponder, would this nicotine test come up positive for her from breathing in second hand smoke if she herself didn't smoke but lived with a smoker? Does everyone see how freakin ridiculous this is?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 7,234
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 7,234 |
Quote:
Quote:
Im even for the nicotine drug tests that some employers have started
Wow, they actually have those now? Holy smoke!
Sure they do. You just hack a green slime ball into a cup. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,826
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,826 |
Quote:
And, a further question to ponder, would this nicotine test come up positive for her from breathing in second hand smoke if she herself didn't smoke but lived with a smoker?
Does everyone see how freakin ridiculous this is?
If mary's husband smoked in the house, yes, her body would have nicotine in it.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,836
Steeler
|
|
Steeler
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,836 |
Quote:
Quote:
And, a further question to ponder, would this nicotine test come up positive for her from breathing in second hand smoke if she herself didn't smoke but lived with a smoker?
Does everyone see how freakin ridiculous this is?
If mary's husband smoked in the house, yes, her body would have nicotine in it.
Okay, so then if you LIVE with a smoker, you can't get hired either.
Wow...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,826
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,826 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
And, a further question to ponder, would this nicotine test come up positive for her from breathing in second hand smoke if she herself didn't smoke but lived with a smoker?
Does everyone see how freakin ridiculous this is?
If mary's husband smoked in the house, yes, her body would have nicotine in it.
Okay, so then if you LIVE with a smoker, you can't get hired either.
Wow...
Exactly. This is a perfect example of someone wanting to enact a rule or law with no comprension of the end results.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,678
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,678 |
Like I said....it's best if we just don't allow people who come of with this stuff from having children.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 809
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 809 |
Quote:
My God, the nannies are never going to stop their tirade, it's pathetic.
That was simply my opinion and clearly not a tirade....Im not a nanny and Im not pathetic, I dont appreciate the name calling... and I dont understand why you feel it helps your case in this disagreement.
Look we agree that rights are being infringed in this case, the difference is that I feel its the smokers infringing on my rights as both a nuisance and a source of pollution, they also raise my health insurance costs.
We don't agree, thats cool... but how about trying to not sling so much mud my way.
When it gets cold and snows and the wind blows, you gotta be able to run the ball. - TR
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367 |
I didn't call you anything, unless you are one of the nannies I'm speaking of. I guess if the shoe fits......
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 809
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 809 |
j/c 'ing huh? fair enough... The shoe may fit though, is it size 15? 
When it gets cold and snows and the wind blows, you gotta be able to run the ball. - TR
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,431
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,431 |
Quote:
they also raise my health insurance costs.
So then you are on board with my banning of fat people then ?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367 |
Hey, Peen doesn't want you to be able to procreate and you pick on me? 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 478
1st String
|
|
1st String
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 478 |
Quote:
Yep, remember people saying when all this started that they were going to go after what people did in the privacy of their own homes and people laughed at them? Keep laughing folks, the do-gooders and nannies aren't happy unless they are controlling everything you do.....
Just remember that they are on both sides of the isle. One set tries to get everyone to conform to their morals and the other tries to conform people to their view of healthy choices.
Both parties feel like it is okay to take away other peoples rights as long as it is the rights they want.
It is just too bad that almost everyone falls into the "nannies and do gooders" label during one argument or another.
Back on Topic.
This is not the government making the smoking ban all over again. These are privately owned companies, and a completely different ball of worms.
One of the arguments I continually heard about the smoking ban was that "if non smokers do not like the smoke they can go elsewhere. Let people create non smoking bars for people who do not want to smoke." Basically, they can either suck it up and deal with the smoke or go else where.
Isn't this the same only in reverse. It is a company deciding that it is not going to hire smokers, because of the health care costs. Don't the smokers have the same choice as the non smokers before. Either suck it up and quit and work at this establishment or go elsewhere for your place of employment,
It just seems like once again people want to have it both ways.
And according to our laws currently. Not hiring someone because they are smoker does not constitute discrimination.
discrimination laws
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 809
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 809 |
how do you mean banning? send them to an island no... however, i would encourage health and wellness in the work place by offering gym memberships and providing access to workshops and seminars on healthy living.
I know of companies that wont hire fat people, I dont see anything wrong with that, but its not the best way to go about simply lowering health care costs.
When it gets cold and snows and the wind blows, you gotta be able to run the ball. - TR
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Tailgate Forum Barring smokers from employment
isn't right
|
|
![[Linked Image from i45.tinypic.com]](http://i45.tinypic.com/adhq2o.gif)
