Off-topic discussions about regional news, issues and politics. Pretty much everything goes here, but keep it polite: Flaming and spamming aren't welcome.
no avatar
User

Steve P

{ RANK }

Foodie

Posts

4848

Joined

Sun Sep 23, 2007 10:18 pm

Smokers Need Not Apply: Is Hiring Ban Trend of the Future?

by Steve P » Mon Nov 22, 2010 1:49 am

What say ye ?

..."Supporters of the hire-no-smokers policy say it will provide smoke-free work environments and help employers control their health-care costs. But critics argue it's a form of discrimination that, moreover, intrudes into the private lifestyle choices of prospective employees"...

For the rest of the story:

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/Wellness/s ... d=12196304
Stevie P...The Daddio of the Patio
no avatar
User

Brian Curl

Re: Smokers Need Not Apply: Is Hiring Ban Trend of the Future?

by Brian Curl » Mon Nov 22, 2010 10:34 am

I agree with the policy. I think many smokers problems are rooted deeper than just the physical idiocy of smoking.
no avatar
User

Robin Garr

{ RANK }

Forum host

Posts

22998

Joined

Tue Feb 27, 2007 2:38 pm

Location

Crescent Hill

Re: Smokers Need Not Apply: Is Hiring Ban Trend of the Future?

by Robin Garr » Mon Nov 22, 2010 11:16 am

I think employers ought to be helping people to quit, even encouraging them to quit (and helping them by providing or subsidizing smoking-cessation services), and I think employers have every right to enforce a smoke-free workplace for the protection of everyone in the building.

But refuse to hire people because they smoke at all? That's kind of creepy, and I'd put them in the same category with employers who put "nanny filters" on the office computers. I wouldn't work for a company like that.
no avatar
User

JustinHammond

{ RANK }

Foodie

Posts

3336

Joined

Wed Jul 09, 2008 6:26 pm

Location

Lyndon, KY 40222

Re: Smokers Need Not Apply: Is Hiring Ban Trend of the Future?

by JustinHammond » Mon Nov 22, 2010 11:44 am

I can see it from both sides. Not hiring someone because they smoke is slightly crazy; what people do (legally) outside of the workplace should not be an employment issue, however it often is. On the other side, if I'm laying in the hospital that last person I want taking care of me is someone fresh off a smoke break. The same is true when dining; the smell of a smoke-soaked server can hamper a meal.
"The idea is to eat well and not die from it-for the simple reason that that would be the end of your eating." - Jim Harrison

https://www.facebook.com/Louisville-Eat ... 129849554/
no avatar
User

Bill P

{ RANK }

Foodie

Posts

966

Joined

Sat Mar 15, 2008 9:20 am

Location

Depauw, IN

Re: Smokers Need Not Apply: Is Hiring Ban Trend of the Future?

by Bill P » Mon Nov 22, 2010 12:07 pm

Robin's post pretty well sums up my feeling on this issue.
What's next? No fatties need apply?
no avatar
User

Madeline M

{ RANK }

Foodie

Posts

516

Joined

Tue Sep 01, 2009 3:17 pm

Location

Greater 'burbs of Detroit

Re: Smokers Need Not Apply: Is Hiring Ban Trend of the Future?

by Madeline M » Mon Nov 22, 2010 12:18 pm

On the same line of thought...what's next? Don't hire people because of their weight? Because they have a medical condition that will cost more or have a child with a medical condition? Maybe they lead a more risky lifestyle (ie go out drinking every night with friends)? All in the name of saving money on an insurance plan?

I don't smoke, I don't like to be around it and I try to avoid it...but I don't agree with this on the principal of where it could go. If this is permittable, where's the line drawn?

The only part I can agree with is that some, not all, smokers take extra breaks thus reducing productivity and creating resentment in the workforce. Why should I work my full shift with 2 breaks while Smoker Joe gets to take 6 breaks a day to have a cigarette? But I've also worked with plenty of people that were just plain lazy and only did half the work I did in a day.
no avatar
User

Steve P

{ RANK }

Foodie

Posts

4848

Joined

Sun Sep 23, 2007 10:18 pm

Re: Smokers Need Not Apply: Is Hiring Ban Trend of the Future?

by Steve P » Mon Nov 22, 2010 12:19 pm

Madeline M wrote: But I've also worked with plenty of people that were just plain lazy and only did half the work I did in a day.


HEY !!!! Were you watching me ??? 8)
Stevie P...The Daddio of the Patio
no avatar
User

Madeline M

{ RANK }

Foodie

Posts

516

Joined

Tue Sep 01, 2009 3:17 pm

Location

Greater 'burbs of Detroit

Re: Smokers Need Not Apply: Is Hiring Ban Trend of the Future?

by Madeline M » Mon Nov 22, 2010 8:29 pm

I'm naming no names! :P
no avatar
User

Mike Hardin

{ RANK }

Foodie

Posts

331

Joined

Thu Mar 01, 2007 11:24 am

Re: Smokers Need Not Apply: Is Hiring Ban Trend of the Future?

by Mike Hardin » Tue Nov 23, 2010 9:54 am

If you're going to go into hypotheticals why not go the other way? Would you hire someone who was addicted to heroin or oxycontin? I was an assistant manager at a video store years ago and an employee informed me she needed a break to go smoke. I told her she couldn't have one to go shoot up so she couldn't have one to go smoke.
no avatar
User

Matthew D

{ RANK }

Foodie

Posts

1347

Joined

Sun Jun 22, 2008 11:22 am

Location

No Longer Old Louisville

Re: Smokers Need Not Apply: Is Hiring Ban Trend of the Future?

by Matthew D » Tue Nov 23, 2010 11:46 am

Mike Hardin wrote:If you're going to go into hypotheticals why not go the other way? Would you hire someone who was addicted to heroin or oxycontin? I was an assistant manager at a video store years ago and an employee informed me she needed a break to go smoke. I told her she couldn't have one to go shoot up so she couldn't have one to go smoke.


Because that's a pretty ridiculous comparison. Heroin is illegal, while smoking is not. And while oxycontin is legal with a prescription, I wouldn't hire someone addicted to it because of the connections between prescription drug addiction and theft.

Would you rather have an employee at your store take a smoke break - some minor consequences like work time lost and smoke smell - or an employee return to work stoned on heroin? It's a ridiculous question, obviously.

With the way the economy is, employers have plenty of potential employees to choose from. While I don't advocate any form of across-the-board discrimination, it's not a seller's market right now. Got to put your best foot forward.
Thinks the frosty mug is the low point in American history.
no avatar
User

Michael Mattingly

{ RANK }

Foodie

Posts

159

Joined

Sat Dec 12, 2009 2:46 am

Location

Paris, France

Re: Smokers Need Not Apply: Is Hiring Ban Trend of the Future?

by Michael Mattingly » Thu Nov 25, 2010 10:11 am

I would like to add the fact that a lot of restaurant workers in countries such as France smoke & even drink alcohol throughout the work day but they also have some of the best food & service in the world.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Claudebot and 0 guests

Powered by phpBB ® | phpBB3 Style by KomiDesign