Posted on 02/07/2005 12:47:37 PM PST by SheLion
And, if a business and employees were smart, they'd get rid of all health benefits and go to the open market for health benefits. Just think of the competition it would create. Instead of thousands of businesses vying for price, it would be millions of individuals looking for bargains. Think Geico for health insurance.
Perhaps in some cities and states but not by the Feds.
"Hanging on for the ride"???? What about helping to SLAM THE BRAKES?
I mean, President Bush just put forth a $2.57 TRILLION budget to Congress--& that's w/ cuts in 150 federal programs! Will he be the one who 1st submits a $3 trillion budget? Or how 'bout a $4 trillion???
This is a total outrage.
Fire someone for being gay, see what happens.
She's not overly empathetic, however, with employees who get fired because they violate company policies - no matter what those policies are.
"If you know that going into the situation, you're aware of what could happen," she said.
Unless of course the rules change in the middle of your career.
They'll sue you and, in most places, they'll lose.
No matter what those policies are....oh really? What about policies that ban you from: 1. consuming wine with dinner at your home? 2. driving convertible sports cars? or SUV's? 3. frequenting "certain" entertainment establishments? 4. wearing "certain" clothing while at the pools...perhaps no bikinis allowed to be wore, ever? This is outrageous, ridiculous, and instrusive. It violates the Constitutional Rights given to ALL Americans...the protections for the pursuit of LIFE, LIBERTY, and an individual's HAPPINESS...not the Company's, not the Government's, but the INDIVIDUAL's RIGHT.
ping
Say this happens, "Joe, your fired, we don't want gays working here." You don't think there'd be a lawsuit? In a heartbeat, and the gay would win.
That is why he/she/it is the "employer", as an employee I have no right to work in their place of business...
Sounds conservative to me...
I like that. Give employees a yearly amount that they can spend on health insurance, and then let them go find their own deal. If they get sick or injured from something they do on their own time, then they truly have to deal with.
And if you hurt yourself to the point that you can't do your job, then you have essentially fired yourself.
If healthcare was the issue, why didn't they just deny them insurance or increase their rates instead of firing them?
This is not big government. This is a private corporation. Those advocating this corporation be prohibited from firing smokers are the ones advocating BIG GOVERNMENT.
Yes, being a member of NAMBLA is a "Legal Activity" that is done in the "Privacy or your Home."
But somehow, I do not think most people on this thread understand the 'unintended consequences' of this law.
The employer gave the women a deadline to quit smoking. Smoking can be an addiction. Anyone here on this thread addicted to anything? Anyone here try to kick an addiction? It's not easy.
So...............you are another one that wants to chop off the heads of people who smoke? All of the above except legally smoking a cigarette, is done behind closed doors, and therefore, none of my business. I don't like the list you gave but being an American, I still respect the people to believe as they like.
As long as they are in their own homes, who are they hurting? I am fighting for the rights of business owners who do not want smoking bans, and I am fighting to keep Freedom of Choice. Freedom of Choice still covers you, even if you DON'T smoke!
I am starting to suspect that we don't have all the information about these terminations.
I am wondering if the employer created a non-smoking environment, but found that the smokers were still smoking on the premises or taking additional breaks because they needed to smoke.
Which is why a lot of places are switching to the hair test.
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.