No longer hiring smokers. Do you support such restrictions?

[callipygoustp]

Why? Smoking isn't a protected class. If a company doesn't want to hire you because of your lifestyle choice, that's on you!

I'm not, nor have I ever been, a regular smoker. I have, on occasion, smoked while drinking way back when I was a kid in college. In general, I find it to be a fairly disgusting habit.

However, if I found out I was turned down for a job because I was a smoker and then I did a little bit of internet research, yeah, I would contact a lawyer.
Smoker protection law

Do I think smokers should be protected? No. But as various websites suggest, employers do not have a right to discriminate against you. So, as I said in the post you quoted:
Sounds like a lawsuit waiting to happen.

And as we've seen, soooooo often in today's world, companies will settle, for a hefty sum, rather than go to court. Queue the cost benefit analysis.

[kail]

Only if they also refuse to hire people that drink alcohol and fat people.

They very well could. Doubt Hooters would hire old or fat waitresses even if they are good at the job.

[cubby]

It blows my mind that cigarettes are still legal, and when the law is eventually changed after having left hundreds of millions, if not billions of casualties in its wake, future generations are going to look back in complete befuddlement that so many people were allowed to die.

You're suggesting a slippery slope though. If things that are "bad for you" are made illegal, that would open the flood gates to all kinds of other foods and drinks and habits.

[NM 156]

I for one cannot wait for the day when the companies we work for get to make all of our life decisions for us!

[Daedius]

It blows my mind that cigarettes are still legal, and when the law is eventually changed after having left hundreds of millions, if not billions of casualties in its wake, future generations are going to look back in complete befuddlement that so many people were allowed to die.

Because it's a highly taxed item that generates a lot of money for Governments. A simple few cents hike in price yields millions.

[melodramocracy]

Hopefully they get trounced in court over this.

[Thereturn]

Do you have any evidence to back up such claims?

We discriminate every time we decide where to eat, whom to date, or what video games to play.

I look forward to your evidence.

The history of closed threads on this forum alone should be evidence enough. One could amass uninfracted posts about white people and infracted posts about other races and present them on a platter. But looking at your (recent) post history in the gun control thread, its pretty evident discussion with you is pointless and endless and i simply dont have the time to convince you about something that is so common knowledge to everyone else that Southpark bothered to make an episode about it.

[Clone]

I honestly have no idea what would be the motivation. Most of their workers are part time, so they don't even offer them insurance. The only full time positions they offer are typically managers or truck drivers.

I just think this company, and others like them, just want to pretend they care when they wont do anything about those who already work there and this will stop nothing.

Smoke breaks.

[Jastall]

Only if they also refuse to hire people that drink alcohol and fat people.

I can't get cancer from second hand alcohol or supersized burgers.

[Machismo]

The history of closed threads on this forum alone should be evidence enough. One could amass uninfracted posts about white people and infracted posts about other races and present them on a platter. But looking at your (recent) post history in the gun control thread, its pretty evident discussion with you is pointless and endless and i simply dont have the time to convince you about something that is so common knowledge to everyone else that Southpark bothered to make an episode about it.

Like I said, evidence?

[ravenswood]

Second hand effects are the only viable arguments against smoking and there are laws to prevent that in the public space.

What about millions of people dying every year? Is that not compelling enough of an argument for you? And please don’t retaliate with some banality about “personal choice”.

- - - Updated - - -

You're suggesting a slippery slope though. If things that are "bad for you" are made illegal, that would open the flood gates to all kinds of other foods and drinks and habits.

You’re the one making the assertion that I am reductively amalgamating all “bad things” into onw category, which I am not, and nobody should do. Cigarettes are distinctly pernicious and should be treated as such. The same with junk food and gambling. As to your point, yes I firmly believe that we need to enforce regulations to protect people from themselves. What benefit to the world does smoking, or junk food, or any of these things responsible for hundreds of millions of deaths every year have?

[xenogear3]

No one wants to hire Albert Einstein after he graduates.

He has to use a backdoor to get a job.

[Pannonian]

You’re the one making the assertion that I am reductively amalgamating all “bad things” into onw category, which I am not, and nobody should do. Cigarettes are distinctly pernicious and should be treated as such. The same with junk food and gambling. As to your point, yes I firmly believe that we need to enforce regulations to protect people from themselves. What benefit to the world does smoking, or junk food, or any of these things responsible for hundreds of millions of deaths every year have?

And alcohol! That worked so well, that it was the first amendment to the consitution to be cut again...

Seriously, if it harms other people: ban it. If it harms myself: leave me alone. No need for government to micro-manage me.

[zenkai]

According to many sources, starting Feburary 1st, Uhaul will no longer hire smokers in 21 states. Do you think this type of cherry picking should even be allowed? Only 21 states allow this, but it still seems too far to me. I don't smoke, but I don't believe a company should have any say in what someone does in their personal life's. Especially when it doesn't impact them on the job.

Do you believe such restrictions should be allowed? Or is this going too far when trying to force your employees to do what you want them to?

I bet the non smoking employees love it, no one wants to work next to someone who smells bad.

[markos82]

I agree and support the decision. Most chain smomirs as well as non chain smokers would smoke everywhere they can that includes the company car, truck and so on. Also I'm not sure if it's banned or not( in the USA) but I would ban smoking inside cars, privately owned included. I don't see a difference between holding a phone while driving and holding a cigarette. Same thing, losing focus, ability to use both hands.. Perhaps that can be one of the reasons I guess..

[cubby]

You’re the one making the assertion that I am reductively amalgamating all “bad things” into onw category, which I am not, and nobody should do. Cigarettes are distinctly pernicious and should be treated as such. The same with junk food and gambling. As to your point, yes I firmly believe that we need to enforce regulations to protect people from themselves. What benefit to the world does smoking, or junk food, or any of these things responsible for hundreds of millions of deaths every year have?

I am; you are; and you did again above. I highlighted the parts where you contradicted yourself. No, I won't address this point again. You know you did. We know you did. Just let it go. I already have.

We can't regulate everything - or if we did, it would be horrific. So we draw some random line somewhere, and make one think illegal, another regulated, and yet another open season. "Things that are bad for you" is perhaps the most ambiguous and subjective phrase possible (aside from "it's art"), it would be hopeless to even try and start to form a commission to think about coming up with rules that would be objective. It can't be perfect, and so it never will be.

[ravenswood]

I am; you are; and you did again above. I highlighted the parts where you contradicted yourself. No, I won't address this point again. You know you did. We know you did. Just let it go. I already have.

We can't regulate everything - or if we did, it would be horrific. So we draw some random line somewhere, and make one think illegal, another regulated, and yet another open season. "Things that are bad for you" is perhaps the most ambiguous and subjective phrase possible (aside from "it's art"), it would be hopeless to even try and start to form a commission to think about coming up with rules that would be objective. It can't be perfect, and so it never will be.

I am saying cigarettes should be made entirely illegal. I am also saying that all bad things, in general, should be regulated, which they generally are. However they should not be regulated in the same way, because they are different. What don’t you understand?

Cigarretes should be made illegal. Junk food should be regulated in schools. These are both “bad” things, but I am encouraging different regulations for both.

Smoking causes millions of people to die every year. Excessive junk food and poor nutrition leads to millions of people dying every year from obesity, diabetes and heart attacks. Drugs ruin lives. Gambling leads people to financial destitution and destroys families. These things are categorically “bad” and have clear, irrefutable consequences. And guess what? They all already face strict regulation.

[Elegiac]

Largely because they stink. And their stink rubs off on everything they touch, meaning the vehicles that other people rent often stink. To top it off, few smokers (IME) keep their smoking to "private time", they're constantly stepping out for a smoke and constantly coming back in reeking.

While we're on the subject of anecdotes, let's talk about people who smoke tobacco/nicotine versus cannabis. And I'm not talking hardcore stoners, comparing casual smokers of either herb.

In the latter case (IME); if you need to medicate and have a day job or something of that sort they find a way to make it work with microdosing edibles or vaping. Like there's a lot of instances where folks I work with chill after a stressful meeting with a low dose. It's unobtrusive.

With tobacco smokers there's just no boundary between private and public time, as you said. I don't know what it is but nicotine just sticks into clothing and hair like nothing else, and for some reason they don't have the courtesy to restrict themselves to patches or gum during work hours.

:upshrug:

[ErrandRunner]

Disgruntled smokers are always saying things like "there's nowhere left for us to smoke" or "why isn't the same pressure put on obese people to stop eating junk/fast food?" but they forgot their actions directly endanger the lives of those close to them when they smoke (through 2nd hand smoke). Fat Bob's junk food isn't going to lessen the number of years I live, but your cigarette does!

[Flarelaine]

I bet the non smoking employees love it, no one wants to work next to someone who smells bad.

Also no one wants to do the work of slackers.