Posted on 02/06/2005 3:44:20 AM PST by 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.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
As many times as it takes to what,inform FR readers of something that has been posted repeatedly for the past couple of weeks?
I never said they did. Only that they should.
Since homosexuality is a unhygienic and medically expensive practice the company should also seek to fire gays.
I thought about this lots last night. I have asthma. I also have cats. Lots of cats. Sometimes, my allergies get the best of me despite medication.
Does this mean according to this employer that if I miss work because of an asthma attack precipitated by my unhealthy attachment to cats which cause an allergic reaction I must give up my cats or be fired?
Using that reasoning and the employer's reasoning, what would prevent my insurance company from demanding that I not only give up my cats, but move to Arizona where there is no Southern Oak or pine pollen to exacerbate my asthma?
What would prevent a whole host of legislation under the guise of "health" that would regulate my life to prevent lost work days or incur medical expense?
"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."
"I never said they did. Only that they should."
I cannot believe you wrote that a company 'should' have the 'right under law' to change their company policy to be able to fire blacks working for them, or the handicapped.
I am sorry, but I have a hard time believing you really meant what you just wrote.
If you do, then I am sorry for you.
Of course it does. However, legal 'conditions of employment' are the controlling factors.
I really like the laws that make me buckle my seatbelt.
"Stepford Drivers."
Allow me to take a "leadership position" here.
Weyco: I will never, ever buy your product. 'Pod.
Well, then. I'm dead meat.
I have to wonder when Weyco will institute quarterly cholesterol screening and body-mass-index testing. Can't have obese employees, that wouldn't be healthy.
Be sorry for me all you want. I meant it. Okay, let's turn this around.
Suppose you own a daycare center. One of your male employees announces that he is having a sex change operation and will henceforth be known as "Tina" instead of "Tom". Should you be able to fire him if you want to? Yes.
You own a Christian book store. One of your employees becomes a Satanist and doesn't keep it a secret. You want to fire him. Should you be able to? Yes.
My point is that if we are going to support freedom of association, we have to be consistent. I never said businesses should fire people for being black or overweight. Only that they should be able to under the law if they choose to do so. They should, and would, be punished for such nutty policies. But it shouldn't be the government doing the punishing.
"Nicotine suppositories" Actually Jayson a suppository would work(although kind of inconvenient form of delivery).It would hit the bloodstream pretty fast.Unfortunately you'd test pos for nicotine use.This applies to chewing tobacco as well.
Lets see, I don't like smokers, I don't like fat people, I don't like people who don't exercise, etc......
I suspect he only likes blue eyed, blonde haired aryans.....
Just curious, what do you suppose the nationality of that name is?
You said: Oh really? How about if your boss doesn't like the girl you are dating? How about if your boss doesn't like your choice of vehicles?
Complete and total freedom is to be allowed to an employer while the employee lives under tyranny?
***
And under what circumstances should an employee be allowed to leave an employer for another job? Would you force an employee to stay at his job if his boss or supervisor was dating a girl he didn't like, drove a car the employee didn't like, etc.? It seems to me it is a two way street. An employee can quit without giving any reason, why doesn't the employer have the same right? There is no "tyranny." If the employee doesn't like the policy, try to change it, live with it or quit. I think the policy is ill-advised, but as others have said, let the market decide.
I honestly would not be surprised if your car was a factor. Seriesly.
I don't think anyone has the right to force an employee to choose between his livelihood and what he does with his free time, like smoking, having a drink, eating a burger....where does it stop? It's forcing him to choose between feeding his family and paying his bills or kowtowing to the PC Corporate police. That's extortion.
I think we need to find the corporate Website and mail these nazis copies of the Constitution.
When your/my employer found it necessary to offer our benefits package to entice you/me to come to work for them. Had they not, we would have worked elsewhere.......The same can be said about your salary. Where in the world did you ever get the idea that your employer should be paying you the salary you are currently making. I sure as heck don't think you are worth it and if you were working for me you'd only be making half of what you're making now.......
They should rename their company "Wacko".
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.