Posted on 12/23/2005 7:13:34 AM PST by Millee
SACKED smoker Sophie Blinman threatened to take her former employers to court yesterday, fuming: "I'm furious. Surely this is discrimination."
Stunned Sophie, 21, was given the boot 45 minutes after starting her new job even though she promised not to light up in office hours.
Her bosses declared: "It's positive discrimination and we're proud of it." Experts agreed the company was not breaking the law. But smokers' pressure group Forest said: "This is outrageous."
Sophie, who smokes five to 10 cigarettes a day, was delighted to land her £6-an-hour job as an administrator at Dataflow Communications.
She said: "I dressed smartly, arrived in good time and was about to be taken on a tour of the offices when I was asked if I smoked. When I said I did, I immediately sensed a problem.
"I explained I'd happily wait until my lunch break to smoke, and leave the premises to do so. But I was told the company didn't employ smokers and there was no longer a position for me.
"I can't believe a business is allowed to have a policy against employing smokers. I was never even asked at my interview if I smoked."
Threatening legal action, Sophie, of Shepton Mallet, Somerset, added: "This has left me angered and unemployed. I shall be seeking legal advice."
Dataflow, which employs 20 workers at its offices in Wells, advertises its non-smokers policy on its website.
Managing director Fran Edwards said: "All our employees have been recruited on this basis. We can't make an exception."
Information Services boss Ian Murray added: "We didn't ask Sophie at her interview if she was a smoker because we assumed the agency that sent her only asked non-smokers to apply."
Employment lawyer Frank Ryan said: "This is unusual, but it doesn't breach the law. Sophie won't qualify for unfair dismissal but she might challenge on the grounds of human rights."
Forest said: "Only smokers can be discriminated against without penalty."
aah, memories of HS restrooms
Boycott dataflow
Actually, there is a genetic pre-disposition of some people to smoke. Much like the "gay" gene, she is bound by her genetic predisposition to engage in an unhealthy behavior.
She should get the ACLU to help her out. Smoking is not wrong, it is an alternative way of breathing. She is a victim. She needs understanding. They are smokophobic.
Oh yea... < /sarc >
Would the company be able to fire or not hire persons who engage in anal sex?
Sorry smokers... SMOKING/SMOKERS are not a "protected class" under the law.. IT is not illegal, at least under federal law to turn away someone because they smoke.
Whats the difference whether the descimination occurred during the interview, or after her hiring?
Tough stuff lady! You work at the pleasure of the employer, not the other way around. The employer told you "SEE YA, WOULDN'T WANNA BE YA!"
Probably if they're doing it on company time. Eeeuw.
If told only non-smokers were to apply, she should not have applied. If you can't live with the rules, don't take the job.
I hear most smokers can quit anytime they want.
Maybe she should have just quit.
Yeah, I remember the HS rest rooms. But you know what I always wondered about? What did the girls do with the cigarette if a teacher walked in? In the boys room there were urinals and it was a simple matter to lay the butt down and since they had to catch you with the butt in your hand we never got caught (well, almost never).
This person needs to know that in Great Britain you have NO rights, and that you are a "Subject of the Crown". It is one the many downfalls of living(existing) in a Monarcy.
Butt photocopiers should get the sack.
Non-homosexual only hiring? Non-religeous people only hiring? Non-alcohol consuming people only? Non-fast food eating people only? Non-fat people only? Non-perfume/cologne using people only? My tag line probably applies to you.
Federal law doesn't apply - this is in Britain.
And how exactly would you react to being fired for being a Republican?
Probably so....if they did it in the office . ;&)
While I don't agree with the filing of lawsuit, I don't understand why a company would have such a policy. A policy against smoking on the premises or taking smoke breaks is understandable, but this? Pure lunacy.
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.