Another topic on the news today.... There's a hospital up north in some state that is banning smokers from applying. This doesn't mean that an old employee gets axed... just new applicants will get filtered out b/c they smoke. The hospital says its unhealthy and they don't want them there. Other people say its discrimination and that they should be able to work there and smoke if they want to. I'm not sure I know of too many smokers that can go all day w/o taking a smoke break... the ones I know go houry. What are your thoughts? Are you in favor of this... I mean smoke and its remnants on your clothes and person can exacerbate someone's allergies plus its one of the unhealthiest things you can do to yourself... Or are you opposed to this b/c maybe you smoke and you want to work there?
For a place such as a hospital I think it is ok. Although it is not the same as a hospital, 90% of my coworkers smoke and they take hourly smoke breaks. Being a server in a restaurant, it is very annoying trying to do my job while watching over other servers sections while they are smoking. You made a valid point with the smoke and such. Hospitals want to be as clean as possible and promote good health, I think they are making the right decision.
I think smokers have the right to work in hospitals but maybe they could have non smoker rooms for those people who have allergies. Other than that I have no comments.
There is a such invention, created by man about half a century ago to promote stress-free, outside breaks away from the lungs of asthma-carrying citizens, called a SMOKING ZONE! Sure, they shouldn't smoke indoors, just like any other typical building full of people, but they should have the right to smoke their dirty stick if they want to! Denying them work but keeping the old workers just make them a bunch of butthurt hypocrites.
There is a such invention, created by man about half a century ago to promote stress-free, outside breaks away from the lungs of asthma-carrying citizens, called a SMOKING ZONE! Sure, they shouldn't smoke indoors, just like any other typical building full of people, but they should have the right to smoke their dirty stick if they want to! Denying them work but keeping the old workers just make them a bunch of butthurt hypocrites.
There's still the matter of the smoke being on their clothes after their break at da smoking zone.
There's still the matter of the smoke being on their clothes after their break at da smoking zone.
It would take plenty of smoking and otherwise directing the smoke on your clothes at a downward angle to do something as drastic as that in a short amount of time. Should they bring bibs and other clothing accessories to attempt to prevent smoke from getting on their person? :P
While there are valid points for both sides I see this as discrimination. Sure, you can dictate that smokers get no special privileges (i.e. extra breaks to smoke) and being a hospital setting I'd have them remove their scrub top (the shirt they wear) while smoking so that it doesn't get saturated with the smell or any particulates which could exacerbate allergies in patients.
The issue I have is that, while smoking is unhealthy for you and those in your immediate vicinity, there is no evidence which I am aware of that social contact with another person after having smoked is in any way dangerous to them.
Sure, it doesn't smell very good, and that can be a minor irritant, but if that's the primary complaint then one should also refuse to hire anyone who wears cologne or perfume, as these are also common causes of allergic reactions and can irritate people.
Sure, it doesn't smell very good, and that can be a minor irritant, but if that's the primary complaint then one should also refuse to hire anyone who wears cologne or perfume, as these are also common causes of allergic reactions and can irritate people.
So long as it's not going on their scrubs and just on their other clothing they can use something like Febreze to remove the smell. My mom use to smoke constantly and did work going to peoples homes as a massage therapist. So she came up with ways to smoke and quickly get the smell off her for her customers. This worked even with the customers who were sensitive to it.
So long as it's not going on their scrubs and just on their other clothing they can use something like Febreze to remove the smell. My mom use to smoke constantly and did work going to peoples homes as a massage therapist. So she came up with ways to smoke and quickly get the smell off her for her customers. This worked even with the customers who were sensitive to it.
Exactly. My wife is a massage therapist, and a smoker, and she's never had any issues with it. She does the same as your mom, she has a travel sized thing of odor neutralizer and it works wonders.
It's fine for a business to hire whoever they want. It is not a matter of discrimination. It's merely a matter of personal preference.
It IS discrimination, and it is discrimination based on someone's personal life choice. How about we refuse to hire people who don't eat meat? Or people who wear black? Or people who paint their toenails? I see no difference, as they are personal lifestyle choices that, esp. with smoking, one can take measures to ensure don't effect anyone else.
It IS discrimination, and it is discrimination based on someone's personal life choice.
But the business (ideally) wants to choose those who will best serve the consumer, because that is the most economically efficient. Thus, if their standards and policies cause them to choose people less "fit" for the job, their business (talking in evolutionary terms) will be "selected out."
apparently the smoker population isn't protected in some areas like say... religious groups (or the lack thereof), ethnic groups, and the disabled (there are more)...
In this instance, I do see it more on the discriminatory side. The hospital also said that it is considering following the same route w/ obese people next. From what I'm told there are some cases of obesity where the individual has little say in their body style... like genetic predispositions and genetic problems that lead to increased fat production... I imagine that this will cause just as much if not more uproar.. especially from the obese smokers.
now something I can't quite wrap my mind around... If someone has the right to do whatever they want... then why can't an employer choose to hire whoever they want based off of whatever frivolous criteria they want? besides the equal opportunity act thing
I do understand that it isn't fair for such things... but they then don't have the right to choose whomever they want to hire and in some instances are forced to hire people that are sub par over someone who actually deserves the job more just to fill a quota... it'd kinda go both ways.
An employer need only choose employees if they fulfill the required skills needed for the job and to see if they will be stable and lasting in said field. Workers being declined on the basis of smoking history and, heaven forbid, obesity, is just maddening.
I'm aware that its just a cop out but... if you want to get technical w/ it. Life expectancy and potential insurance costs w/ these individuals are also in this equation. My Guyton & Hall Med Phys book (med school caliber) states that 1/4 of cancer related deaths are caused by carcinogens that are inhaled from smoking. A smoker is a higher risk person when it comes to life or death for the simple fact that your habit will eventually decline your health... if not kill you. A healthier habit'ed person has a higher probability of living longer and therefore being in the job position for longer. Granted, I've heard of a marathon runner over in the UK who was 100+ who after each race would immediately light up a cigar and drink a beer. His statement was "It hasn't killed me yet." ...or something to that effect.
Obesity is almost in the same boat... it is unhealthy and will cause health problems eventually if prolonged and/or the state of the obesity is worsened. If the insurance that some businesses are required to pay for increases b/c ur a smoker/obese person then you are costing them extra money just for being employed that they wouldn't have to cough up if you didn't smoke and/or weren't obese.
I still don't think its right... but that's the other side of the argument as I've formed it in my mind.
Exactly Sona, hospitals almost always provide medical insurance to their employees at little to no cost. Too many employees who smoke or are obese will increase the premiums and reduce profits. I wouldn't be surprised if this is a major factor in this decision.
