No jobs for smokers

[Lason]

Exactly. Not only that, but the smell is in your skin.

and clothes and hair and breath and vehicle and house.....

Seriously I didnt realize how bad I stunk till I quit. I had to get new furniture because even though I never smoked in my house the furniture picked it up from my clothes.

My wife tried to quit at the same time as me but gave in to it and tries to sneak smokes all the time and is shocked when I can smell her across the room.

[03trubluGT]

As far as the job thing goes, I can see their point about insurance but its still discrimination. They either need to treat smokers equally or make cigarettes illegal.

That's the ticket!

I vote to make cigarettes and alcohol illegal!!!!

Sarcasm from another thread...

[SSMAN]

Alcohol impaires your ability to work, smoking does not.

A better comparison would have been to say that you have the right to drink but your employer can say he doesnt want you working for him because he saw you hanging out at the sports bar last weekend with a beer in your hand.

I remember getting an eye hit one time I could not see. LOL, just messing with you. I agree it should be left up to the employer. Most of them are flipping the bill for some of the health benefits, so they should have a say so in the matter.

[SSMAN]

That's the ticket!

I vote to make cigarettes and alcohol illegal!!!!

Sarcasm from another thread...

I would go along with this. I even like to drink, but I don't have to drink.

[347Mike]

I would go along with this. I even like to drink, but I don't have to drink.

Then move to some small Arkansas town where it is. Lol

[Buck Nasty]

I've smoked 5 cigarettes while reading all of this..

[347Mike]

I've smoked 5 cigarettes while reading all of this..

You must be slow.

[Buck Nasty]

You must be slow.

Nah,im just a fast reader.

[mikeb]

You cant help be social walking outside to burn one down at work on break. Now i just prefer hang out at my desk instead of going out there. Just one of many examples.

I think that you just hit on one of the reasons baylor did this - people stepping outside to "burn one" every hour, instead of being at their desks working. That costs baylor about 8-10 minutes of every hour of productivity per employee that smokes, assuming that they smoke 1 per hour.

Since baylor is a health oriented business - having employees clustered around smoking outside the doors with patients coming and going is probably a bad image for them.

And doctors standing at the side of patient's beds reeking is another bad image that the patient will take away.

So i see this move as a hygiene/image/health/healthcare cost issue.

Does baylor have the right to do this? I think so. In fact, I see it eventually becoming policy among all large companies. As an example, do you remember when people could smoke at their desks? Seems unthinkable now. And some company somewhere was the first to enact a no smoking policy at your desk.

Speaking of fatties - I can tell you from first-hand knowledge that employers are hesitant to hire them, so they are already in the unemployment boat that's coming for smokers.

[TENGRAM]

[ceyko]

Speaking of fatties - I can tell you from first-hand knowledge that employers are hesitant to hire them, so they are already in the unemployment boat that's coming for smokers.

I'm not arguing with you at all. However, yeah my whole office rolls out every 1-2 hours for 5-10 minutes and get back to what we were doing. We take short or long lunches and so on. We're often talking about work stuff and planning while on breaks/at lunch.

I prefer to call them meetings.

Anyway, I work across the street from what used to be a Perot Systems office - which is now Dell. Anyway, they are not allowed to smoke. They still do though and it takes them longer than I'm sure it did before. They have to cross 2 lanes of Plano Parkway onto what is my office area's land to smoke. A lot of smokers are not time card punchers, so it's still going to happen.

Although, I get it and why some employers want to do it. Hell, I'm about to do work for a Hospital in Amarillo (that is already like this) and there is zero smoking anywhere. So, I'm taking some patches and nicotine gum. Going to be work 18-24 hours in a row without a smoke.

Again, it should be the owner's choice. Both for allowing or NOT allowing smoking. Goes back to that bar/restaurant thing as well. If I don't like it *I* have to deal with it. I could even start my own company that allows smoking...

It's not complicated.

[UserX]

Fat people should be unemployable too, overeating is digusting and an addiction. And they smell bad.

[Slowhand]

lol, is this seriously an argument? 5-10 minutes of no productivity every hour, higher health care costs for the employer; they've got all the right in the world to not hire smokers.

[TENGRAM]

lol, is this seriously an argument? 5-10 minutes of no productivity every hour, higher health care costs for the employer; they've got all the right in the world to not hire smokers.

Do you really think anyone is productive the entire time they are at work?

[Slowhand]

Do you really think anyone is productive the entire time they are at work?

Certainly not, but when you've got a subset of employees that schedules in their un-productivity then I'd call it a problem.

That's still not the end issue here, though. Smokers, taken as a lone variable, cost more to insure. Period. Factor in that health-care costs are non-value adding and you have an extremely profitable and legal policy that's long overdue.