Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst
1
2
3
4
5
... LastLast
  1. #41
    Quote Originally Posted by StayTuned View Post
    It's their company. They can hire whomever they want unless they're actively profiling against a protected class.

    Smokers aren't a protected class.

    This being said, I think it's entirely retarded because who the fuck cares what their employees do in their private time?
    Smokers have to take breaks to go smoke, they smell like shit, and if they smoke near the business they can cause customers to choke. I would never hire a smoker either.

  2. #42
    Quote Originally Posted by GreenJesus View Post
    Smokers have to take breaks to go smoke, they smell like shit, and if they smoke near the business they can cause customers to choke. I would never hire a smoker either.
    I think its for this exact reason that a ton of places have dedicated areas for smokers to stand. I know seeing them outside of a gas station is kind of off putting since its possible they will be annoyed they have to stop smoking to deal with you.
    Quote Originally Posted by scorpious1109 View Post
    Why the hell would you wait till after you did this to confirm the mortality rate of such action?

  3. #43
    Banned Saninicus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Iron city of Dis
    Posts
    5,566
    Quote Originally Posted by callipygoustp View Post
    Sounds like a law suit waiting to happen.
    It won't win. They aren't a protected class. Plus smokers fucking duck out of work all the time to light up.

  4. #44
    Merely a Setback Sunseeker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    In the state of Denial.
    Posts
    25,895
    Quote Originally Posted by Hellobolis View Post
    Kinda reads like they can only do this because cultural attitude towards smoking has shifted. cause i'm guessing it was just as legal 10-20 years ago as it is today.
    Culture and acceptable social norms change. Shocker!

    Have a feeling if they tried to do this with e.g. overweight people (who no doubt also cost the company extra on average), they would have a PR shitstorm on their hands.
    All things are not socially the same, and therefore cannot be acted upon as though they were.
    Quote Originally Posted by Masark View Post
    People in cars cause accidents. Accidents in cars cause people.
    "That's my style; I like to kick 'em when they're down!"
    And thus I give you: MALE contraception!

  5. #45
    Old God Mistame's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Over Yonder
    Posts
    10,016
    Quote Originally Posted by Sunseeker View Post
    All things are not socially the same, and therefore cannot be acted upon as though they were.
    Not disagreeing with you, but every time I see "social(ly)" I cringe a bit, as if it's some "standard" with value. It's not. Social media is the perfect example of this. Millions of half-wits spewing their opinions as if they have meaning.

  6. #46
    Merely a Setback cubby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    the Quiet Room
    Posts
    26,748
    Quote Originally Posted by Zantos View Post
    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 think it's perfectly reasonable. I don't it's a matter of forcing their employees to do what they want them to do, I think it's a matter of employers wanting to hire healthy people. Healthy people are less sick and cost less money in any number of categories.
    No one is above the law!

  7. #47
    It falls out of protected class so technically it's fine. I hope this doesn't head to some slippery slope where more companies follow suit. It shouldn't be an extra challenge to get a job because of what you do in your spare time.
    The wise wolf who's pride is her wisdom isn't so sharp as drunk.

  8. #48
    Quote Originally Posted by kail View Post
    It falls out of protected class so technically it's fine. I hope this doesn't head to some slippery slope where more companies follow suit. It shouldn't be an extra challenge to get a job because of what you do in your spare time.
    This leads to the catch 22... most things people do in their spare time is neither illegal, or protected... so companies can make it impossible to be hired without lying, and then be free to fire the employee for lying during the hiring process when it turns out they drink coffee.

  9. #49
    Old God Vash The Stampede's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Better part of NJ
    Posts
    10,527
    If you've been around smokers you know they tend to take far more breaks than none smokers do. Plus the actual smoke itself ruins the interior of vehicles. If you're paying for health insurance then this is an obvious problem for you. I'd have no problem if workers are allowed to vape, as that can be used indoors without making nonsmokers hack their lungs out and is healthier. Plus vaping won't ruin the interior of the vehicles.

  10. #50
    The Unstoppable Force breadisfunny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    flying the exodar...into the sun.
    Posts
    24,780
    Quote Originally Posted by Zantos View Post
    Be that as it may, they still don't offer insurance to part time workers, which makes up most of their employee count.
    par for the course for most companies in the u.s.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Vash The Stampede View Post
    If you've been around smokers you know they tend to take far more breaks than none smokers do. Plus the actual smoke itself ruins the interior of vehicles. If you're paying for health insurance then this is an obvious problem for you. I'd have no problem if workers are allowed to vape, as that can be used indoors without making nonsmokers hack their lungs out and is healthier. Plus vaping won't ruin the interior of the vehicles.
    unless you work retail in which you typically don't get a smoke break.
    r.i.p. alleria. 1997-2017. blizzard ruined alleria forever. blizz assassinated alleria's character and appearance.
    i will never forgive you for this blizzard.

  11. #51
    Quote Originally Posted by breadisfunny View Post

    unless you work retail in which you typically don't get a smoke break.
    No one gets a smoke break. They just do it. I worked with smokers when I was in fast food. They constantly would go outside and smoke for 10-15mins almost every other hours. Meanwhile, I was busting my butt cleaning the kitchen, stocking the food and preparing things to be cooked. I grew to detest them for that. Especially since the manager also smoked so they were part of the problem.

    I am all for them setting restrictions. Like not smoking on company property and not smoking while on the clock. But I just can't agree with them not hiring people because they smoke. Obese individuals cost more. Many protected people who are disabled cost more. Older individuals cost more. So many people they hire cost additional money.

    The sad truth is, even if this is a slippery slope, no one is safe from discrimination. People don't get hired for all kinds of reasons that should be "protected" status. As long as the company doesn't flat out state to you that they are not hiring you for whatever reason, they are safe and clear. Especially since they don't even owe you a call back. Zero accountability for businesses.
    Quote Originally Posted by scorpious1109 View Post
    Why the hell would you wait till after you did this to confirm the mortality rate of such action?

  12. #52
    The Unstoppable Force
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Sacramento
    Posts
    23,688
    If it doesn't affect you on the job then it should be no business of your employer's what you do in your free time.

    I can understand if they're taking frequent smoke breaks or smell of smoke at work or something like that, but I think a blanket ban is bad. Your work should not control you outside of work hours you are paid for.

  13. #53
    Stood in the Fire
    Join Date
    Dec 2019
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    472
    Sure, smoking is disgusting.

  14. #54

  15. #55
    I support it.

    What I said earlier is the primary reason. Yes, we do have smokers that adbid by the rules everyone else deals with (15 min break every 2 hours is our company policy) and they also play a higher insurance price than non-smokers and I cannot say I really have a problem with them. They even have to leave company property to smoke and they do. So those people I would not forcefully fire for example. They follow the rules and get what others get equally and pay more for health insurance because they are at a higher risk.

    At the same time we also have smokers that disappear for 10 minutes every hour. Lie on their insurance forms to not have to pay the hiked rate. Are seen on cameras smoking right outside the doors. Honestly they do bring the whole down. But it is kind of always that way. A few bad apples ruin it for those that work within the rules sadly.

  16. #56
    Yup.

    1) Smokers cause insurance spikes
    2) They're a liability, why add increased risk of workforce death, causes me to waste time hiring more people
    3) In general when not able to consistently smoke they get jittery and lose focus.

    in short...fuck'em imagine smoking in 2020 omegalawl

  17. #57
    The Undying Themius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    34,283
    It depends on business. As I noted earlier about smoking rates. If I run a company that has a lot of Chinese men h1bs like say... a tech company. Considering over 52% of Chinese men smoke, I couldn’t get away with it.

  18. #58
    Quote Originally Posted by Wyrt View Post
    If it doesn't affect you on the job then it should be no business of your employer's what you do in your free time.

    I can understand if they're taking frequent smoke breaks or smell of smoke at work or something like that, but I think a blanket ban is bad. Your work should not control you outside of work hours you are paid for.
    If you are not going to smoke during the work hours, you can just say you are non-smoker. They won't check what you do at home...
    and the geek shall inherit the earth

  19. #59
    Quote Originally Posted by d00mGuArD View Post
    If you are not going to smoke during the work hours, you can just say you are non-smoker. They won't check what you do at home...
    Except smokers aren't really known for their restraint, and ability to not actually smoke.
    Quote Originally Posted by Knadra View Post
    Multiculturalism hurts and kills. This happened before Trump and it would be happening without him. Racism arises from a multicultural society. If we were monocultural, people would not see issues through the lens of race.
    This is a poster saying that people are at fault for being the victims of terrorism, because they are not white.

  20. #60
    Restricting smoking during work because of things like second hand smoking or cleaning the smoke residue makes sense but banning smokers in general doesn't seem reasonable.
    Quote Originally Posted by Daevelian View Post
    So this is how far the Lore forum has fallen? Eesh.
    I take it back, BfA is not the lowest the games lore could have gone, this thread proves that.
    Quote Originally Posted by Aucald View Post
    And just like the thread before it, let's back away from sexualizing Azshara and return to the original topic at hand.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •