The Stepford Employees

The Washington Times ^ | Feb. 5, 2005 | Bob Barr

[MisterRepublican]

In last year's remake of the 1970s classic science fiction file, "The Stepford Wives," a group of techno-weirdos set out to transform imperfect women into perfect wives. Of course, the plan fails because of... well, a lot of reasons.

But the point is, the world remains as full of weirdos today seeking to create the perfect person as when Pygmalion tried many centuries ago. Now, the "Stepford Search" has come to corporate America.

Weyco Inc., a Michigan company, has decided to fire any employee who smokes. Not just any employee who smokes on the job. Any employee who smokes anywhere, anytime, anyhow. Why? To help the employees make healthful life choices and become better persons; to help the employees "manage their health care."

How does the company ensure its employees remain truly and permanently "smoke free?" Mandatory "drug" tests. If traces of the "devil weed" tobacco are found, the hapless employee who thought he or she lived in a free country — one in which a citizen could practice such horrible habits as lighting up a cigarette or cigar in the "privacy" of his or her home — is summarily fired.

In the 1950s and 1960s, the decades of my misspent youth, we harbored the illusion such menaces as nuclear war or communist invasion were the real enemies of freedom. How wrong we were. The good folks running America just four or five decades later, including the Weyco Gestapo, know the real enemy of man is not the trivial nuclear holocaust, but smoking. And they will leave no freedom unturned in their zeal to root it out wherever it might still lurk.

[sgtbono2002]

As many times as it takes. Pretty soon they will fire anyone who has a motorcycle, or anyone who owns a gun, perhaps they will fire anyone who gets sick more than twice a year.

[rawhide]

'But I believe businesses should be able to hire and fire whomever they please for whatever reasons they want.'

What is they did not like the color of your skin? Or the fact you became handicapped after an accident, and they do not want to have handicapped people working for them? Do you think the company should have the right to fire these people? You did say 'for whatever reasons'. What is your answer?

[G.Love]

You people? Which people am I?

See post #13.

[goldstategop]

What a company tells an employee to do during work hours is a part of the relationship concomitant between the employer and the employee. When an employee punches out his work card and leaves the job, what he does or doesn't do on his own personal, non-work time is none of the company's business. 'Nuff said.

Denny Crane: There are two places to find the truth. First God and then Fox News."

[Wilhelm Tell]

The apathy exhibited by the free marketers only encourages this kind of abuse by employers. They don't realize what kind of world they are handing down to their progeny (or don't care).

Do we really want to be a society again with signs like, "No Negroes need apply" or "No Irish need apply"? Now discrimination is again in vogue, as long as it supports a politically correct agenda. I once read a management book that suggested that employees' cars be secretly checked for NRA and other "right wing" bumper stickers, and the employess so outed should be targeted in the next round of layoffs (because "right wingers" and gun owners are likely to be violent and we don't want to employ such people). The same leftists who howl in protest if a bus driver is tested for illegal drugs are the first ones to want to fire a mail clerk for using tobacco at home. The same leftists would give preferences to gays, even though homosexuals are likely to have more expensive health problems than smokers.

[Hardastarboard]

So I'm sure that liberals won't have a problem if Weyco starts to manage their employees in other ways. For instance, they could insist that their employees refrain from sexual activities that carry a high risk. Such activities might include anal sex with strangers in bath houses or toilet stalls. Or, since lambskin condoms don't actually prevent disease, they might want to eliminate the use of those.

Since alcohol and firearms also carry risks to the health of the employees, those will also have to be verboten. And any car that can travel over 70 mph is definitely out. Don't even ask about motorcycles.

Follow the money. It's all about who pays for the risk. This is why we don't want socialized medicine. It gives the payor (the government, the only force in this world who can permanently take ANYTHING from you) the right to prevent you from engaging behavior that taps their wallet, and your freedom be damned.

[goldstategop]

Or any one who posts on Free Republic. I can imagine a Weyco employee being summarily fired, not for smoking, but for merely being critical of company policy. Where does it stop?

Denny Crane: There are two places to find the truth. First God and then Fox News."

[G.Love]

That's my point.

Yes, they should have a right to fire any person they want, for whatever reason, including being gay, black, female, handicapped, ugly, fat, or over 50.

Again, I wouldn't agree with any of these policies, only the right of the company to make them. But they won't stay in business long if they do.

[sittnick]

In last year's remake of the 1970s classic science fiction file, "The Stepford Wives," a group of techno-weirdos set out to transform imperfect women into perfect wives. Of course, the plan fails because of... well, a lot of reasons.

Actually, the plan succeeded. My wife and I recently saw the "TV-movie" quality 1975 Stepford Wives and in the final scene (spoiler coming) the heroine is just like all of the other nice wives, shopping pleasantly, slowly and methodically in her hat and sundress at the Stepford Waldbaum's Super Market.

Actually, Connecticut might be better politically if it happened. (It couldn't get much worse.)

[Jaysun]

Perhaps this will finally create a market for my nicotine suppositories idea.

[EVO X]

Follow the money. It's all about who pays for the risk. This is why we don't want socialized medicine.

Bingo

[Right_in_Virginia]

If I were on the jury, I'd side with the company. They should be free to come up with any nutty policy they see fit to implement.

I'm sure you meant to exclude any "nutty policy" that has to do with race, gender, disability or sexual orientation.

[Osage Orange]

I would like to propose that we fire all state and federal legislators that drink, or smoke. And also fire the overweight, and anyone over the age of 68.

There, I feel better.....

[Grateful One]

And can it only be a matter of time, when someone will be fired for reading Ann Coulter at home, in the wee hours of the a.m.?

[rawhide]

'Yes, they should have a right to fire any person they want, for whatever reason, including being gay, black, female, handicapped, ugly, fat, or over 50. '

Sorry, the company has no rights under the law to make it a company policy to fire blacks, or the handicapped, just because they decided to make a change in their company policy. No rights, whatsoever! They can try to do it, but they have no rights to do this that would protected by law, and they would find themselves sued out of business.

[trickyricky]

And what next, weight tests for all employees, and if they are overweight,
they must lose the poundage with a set number of months, or they too will be fired?

Why stop there?
Some people have dangerous hobbies:
Mountain climbing
Skydiving
Off-roading
Auto racing
Some people have defective genes.
Some people have personalities, you'd just like to slap them.
We have to weed out risky people, and people with risky behaviors.
It's for the good of the rest of us, who are perfect in every way.

"Oh Lord, it's hard to be humble.
When you're perfect in every way."

[rawhide]

"The employees don't have to live under tyranny. They can work elsewhere."

"Oh really? Have you looked for a job when you are over 50 years of age?

Have you ever worked for a place to the point you are almost vested in benefits and the rules suddenly change?

You people don't live in the real world and neither do tyrants like this guy."

My points exactly!!!

[freepatriot32]

ping

[kittymyrib]

Give your employer freedom from having to pay your health insurance and you can smoke yourself to death. Where in the world did we ever get the idea that someone else should pay your doctor bills? As Rush says, why not make your company pay for your food and housing too? The employer is only being prudent about his money when he controls your health choices. And if you don't like it, find another employer.

[NoControllingLegalAuthority]

Since some here live in a moral vacuum, I'll summarize.

This issue involves something called decency and respect for the dignity of human beings.

I strongly believe in freedom but freedom requires responsibility and respect. I owe my employer an honest day's work with a positive attitude. He owes me not just the paycheck I have earned but basic respect for me as a human being who is willing to toil for him and contribute to his profit.

My employer's leverage does not extend to his being free to be my jailer or guardian as if I am an imbecile or minor child.

He is not my "master."

He is my employer.

There is a significant difference and a civilized society must confirm those differences.

The massive labor unheavals, strikes and violence of the past are the evidence of the bitter harvest coming from the disrespect for workers.