Hey, at least the company will be able to keep its healthcare costs down. Cancer, emphysema, etc are expensive diseases to treat.
Do you really believe anyone's healthcare costs are going to go down?
True, but where does it end? When will employers start asking to see someone's private medical records to determine employability? I believe that private business is private, but then this private business is jumping over into a private individual's rights.
They are. So are other diseases. Smoking related diseases tend to differ from others. Cancer and emphysema from smoking tend to be late onset diseases. Employers would on average to get many years of productive employment from an individual before any diseases manifest. Other "behavior factor" illnesses tend to manifest themselves much earlier in life. I'd like to see some statistics on the "costs" smokers cause the employer vs the costs others bring.
Young fertile women add significantly health care costs on a company every time they have a baby. Not only for the immediate costs and lost work time, but by adding another body that will require 20 years of expenses.
By personal observation, obese employees add far more medical costs at far younger ages than smokers who tend to remain thiner. Are 20 years worth of medications to treat weight related diabetes and all of its myriad of complications less expensive than say several months of cancer therapy for a dying smoker who statistically is more likely to be retired (and thus off the employers health care) or nearing retirement after years of productive employment.
Should a company fire pregnant women or individuals who exceed normal body weight because it's good for the bottom line?
I have a feeling that from a cost analysis, this company could not justify its actions unless it treated other common 'behavior' related health conditions in the same way. It looks, on the surface, to be political correctness run wild.