Posted on 08/28/2005 3:16:49 PM PDT by elkfersupper
A classified ad from automobile firm Toyota in Asker and Bærum specifying that smokers will not be employed has sparked controversy. "This is lifestyle fascism. You have to ask, what next? Will it be the fat, the ugly, those with heart trouble or smelly feet?" said social medicine professor Per Fugelli.
A full-page ad in local newspaper Budstikka made it clear that smokers were unwanted at the Toyota offices in the Oslo suburb.
"People must be aware that a car firm has large open areas. Out of consideration to both the working environment and clients we must be very clear that it is smoke-free here," Toyota manager Henrik Junker told newspaper Dagbladet.
Junker does not agree that the ad discriminates, but Professor Fugelli wants to sound an alarm.
"This can be the first warning sign that we - following a pattern from the USA - are heading towards a situation where the employer invades a person's lifestyle and private life in a sinister and offensive way," Fugelli said.
"This is lifestyle fascism. You have to ask, what next? Will it be the fat, the ugly, those with heart trouble or smelly feet?"
"This can be the first warning sign that we - following a pattern from the USA - are heading towards a situation where the employer invades a person's lifestyle and private life in a sinister and offensive way,"
Ping!
All thing being equal: I have no problem with a Private business determining the type of people they want to hire. That being said, employers can definately not hire homosexuals as well because of the proven link of disease, death, and hospitalization among them. Hey if you want a job trim yourself to fit the world, but don't sell your soul doing it.
Agreed. The point the professor makes is "Where does it stop?"
This is just plain discrimination. Do they hire fat folks, gay folks, folks with AIDS, black folks, asian folks and illegals too?
Those folks aren't society's "goats" yet. They'll get their chance.
The lifestyle police are getting out of hand. It's a control thing, they figure if you will bow down to their control on one thing, they're sure you can be manipulated on other things. They are looking for weak people, and they are finding them.
The private business owner should be allowed to discriminate based on any means he/she wishes. It should never stop. However, I would stop shopping there.
Yes, they will get to them and a good portion of them are about as rude as they believe the smokers' are. When it happens there will be no sympathy from me!
In the corporate world, it's called "project creep"..once they ban smokers, they can ban fat people on the basis that they already ban smokers for health reasons..once smokers and fat people, they go after the next group, whoever that may be..and on and on and on..
This is the primary reason I refuse, under any circumstances, to use those "discount cards" at the grocery store..much as they say they don't, I believe a record of what is being purchased per card is being kept..based on this article, what's to prevent a possible future employer from obtaining this list, then determining they won't hire me based on what I buy because they don't deem it healthy?
That's why the "Where does it stop" come from..
I'm torn on the subject. On one hand, I abhor being around smoke. I avoid it at all costs, because I'm so allergic. Being fat, etc., does not really affect others on the job, but the smoke in the air I breathe does.
And, I've noticed that smokers get "breaks" on the job to smoke while the rest of us plug away and work.
That said, I dislike this kind of selection. But trust me on this, selection does happen on many levels, but it's not spoken about except behind closed doors.
Uh--an allergic reaction requires protein. There are no proteins in tobacco smoke.
What that guy said. Worth repeating.
stop being so unsophisticated, you morons. to make the world a beautiful place, you simply outlaw the unbeautiful. Duh!
""This can be the first warning sign that we - following a pattern from the USA - are heading towards a situation where the employer invades a person's lifestyle and private life in a sinister and offensive way," Fugelli said."
Employer invading a person's livestyle?? What utter trash. The liberal demonrats are just getting what they are demanding, how many cities have outlawed smoking in goberment buildings and worse, privately owned restaurants, bars, homes next. You can go to a monster truck show in the Astrobox but can't smoke in it, go figure.
That's a very global statement.
Uh, my Pulmonary Specialist told me to stay away from cigarette smoke because I'm allergic to it. I carry an Epipen in the case that I'm around cigarette smoke and have an asthma attack. My asthma is triggered by allergies, cigarette smoke being the worst, according to him. I've had some near deadly attacks from exposure to cigarette smoke. I don't patronize any business that allow smoking inside.
I agree that a private business should have lots of freedom to do as they wish. This is Toyota's way of trying to hold down medical insurance costs. They probably also don't hire older people or grossly overweight people. It's smart business as long as they can get the qualified workers that they want. Maybe it will even motivate some potential employess to improve their lifestyles. It's their choice, if they want to be considered as a potential employee.
I'm sure there would be no objection if the business required all employees to smoke. (/spin)
You said: The private business owner should be allowed to discriminate based on any means he/she wishes. It should never stop. However, I would stop shopping there.
I think you have nailed it. Employers can hire and not hire whom they wish, for whatever reason. Customers of the employer can shop or not at their businesses. Potential employees can apply or not where they like. Employees can quit for any reason or no reason.
I don't care for smoking, but I am not allergic. All things being equal, I'd hire a non-smoker over a smoker every time. Where the smoker is more qualified, I'd probably hire the smoker. But is what I would do. Each employer is, and ought to be, free to hire anyone they want to. No one has the right to both smoke and insist on being employed by an particular employer.
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.