Posted on 12/10/2005 1:40:02 PM PST by Crackingham
Scotts Miracle-Gro Co., looking for ways to hold down health insurance costs, will require workers who smoke to quit by October or lose their jobs. The lawn and garden company wants workers to live healthy lifestyles, said James Hagedorn, the company's chairman and chief executive. Scotts recently opened a $5 million fitness and medical facility. Scotts is joining other companies focusing on smokers to cut health insurance costs. Some companies make employees who smoke pay higher health insurance premiums, or don't hire them.
"Why would we admit someone into this environment when they're passing risk along to everyone else? Our view is we shouldn't and we won't," Hagedorn said.
Scotts, which made $100 million on sales of $2.3 billion in its last fiscal year, has 6,000 employees in the United States and overseas. It said it can fire smokers legally in 21 states.
"We're being as aggressive as the law will allow us, to keep our costs under control," Hagedorn said.
Scotts pays for 75 percent of employees' health insurance but won't say how much that runs. The company also will require higher premiums for workers who refuse to take a health survey in 2006. In 2007, premiums will rise for workers who don't follow doctor recommendations to improve their health.
In a 2004 survey of 270 professionals, the Society for Human Resource Management found 4.4 percent preferred to not hire smokers. Fewer than 1 percent said their companies have a formal policy against hiring smokers.
This year, Okemos, Mich.-based Weyco Inc. began firing workers who smoke.
Scotts, based in this town 30 miles northwest of Columbus, is offering free counseling, nicotine patches and classes on quitting to workers who smoke. The company hasn't figure out how it will determine whether employees are in compliance, spokesman Jim King said.
Smokers unite! Boycott all products and services from employers who don't permit their employees to smoke.
Somebody start a boycott list and publicize it.
I quit years ago too and am sorry I waited so long, but it's a private decision. Beginning January 1 my employer's health plan is going self-insured, and they will force all of us to have our cholesterol and blood sugar checked. Ever so kindly this will be provided free of charge on site. And they will pass out little pedometers for their "wellness" program in an effort to make everybody exercise. We will be tracked all year as they measure our every step, recheck our HDL, LDL and blood sugar levels, and try to force everybody into good health. I can't wait to see what happens to those who don't embrace this with the "proper attitude". And they will offer smoking cessation clinics. The unspoken threat is your health premiums will go way up if you don't get in lockstep with the program. I find this extremely intrusive even though I expect my test results to be in the healthy range and I already walk daily because the dog makes me.
Damn Nanny Corporation.
I wonder if these health costs include people who are trying to quit with the help of prescriptions?
Do they expect everyone to quit "cold turkey" ?
Absolutely. But I demand that 75% of all their profits be donated to Republican causes or I won't buy their products. Makes about as much sense, doesn't it?
Yeah! and they give off deadly methane gas too.
All the more reason why health care should not be tied to employment.
Here's an idea. Stop offerring health insurance, increase the workers pay by the amount saved from premiums, and let them buy their own health insurance (or not).
I don't blame Miracle-Gro-- smoking is probably interfering with the assimilation of those fertilizer chemicals.
I dunno... Does this strike anyone else as being ever-so-slightly humorous? I mean, I'd almost be willing to wager that the inhalation of Miracle-Gro dust does as much to boost their insurance costs as cigarette smoke.
Oh, I get it. Freedom is a two way street. Employers have no duty to employ people. People have no right to a job. You want to work in defense, you have to pass a security clearance. You want to work in finance or upper management, you better have an MBA. If there are non-smokers who are less of a liability to an employer, then you better give it up of get a skill they can't live without.
Sounds good to me...
Scotts's Turf Builder toxicity.
http://householdproducts.nlm.nih.gov/cgi-bin/household/brands?tbl=brands&id=19026002
Couldn't agree more and I'm in the health care field. Compared to the general population I've got it good in terms of cost of coverage, but I can only use network MD's and services. When I travel I'm up the creek if I need medical care -- I'll have to pay 50% of the cost which can be substantial if I were involved in a car wreck, had a heart attack, etc. It would make much more sense to say "we're going to give you $X per month for health care -- go find the plan that suits your needs." The employer would be freed up from the annual shopping and negotiating with insurance companies, and the consumer could buy a plan that fits their situation. Competition for the business would regulate the marketplace.
Does this include marijuana or just tobacco?
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.