Posted on 11/29/2006 3:01:47 PM PST by GQuagmire
That's what I did...and I smoke in my office all the time. I just have to be careful I don't "offend" any Smoke Nazi's out in public now.....
Just goes to show you that when you accept goodies from anyone, especially Uncle Sam, you give up some of your freedom. Letting your employer decide your private lifestyle in exchange for medical benefits is a perfect example.
I personally think the stockholder driven quarter to quarter performance metrics are one of the banes of modern corporate decision making but that's another discusion entirely.
Absolutely right. You have every right to fire Scotts as your supplier. I'd do the same, but I've found that Scott's stuff is overpriced and no better than the store brands. Haven't bought the brand in years.
That's why it's called "employment at-will." I can choose to hire you for my own reasons, you can choose to quit for your own reasons, or you can choose not to apply for your own reasons, as long as none of those reasons are "protected" under the law (i.e., protected status). If you don't like the way a company discriminates legally, then don't work for them.
Awesome. I love hearing from fellow entrepreneurs. I'm with you on the Smoke Nazi's in public, but I don't smoke in my office because I don't like the lingering smell. Plus, it gives me an excuse to take a 10-minute break and pace outside (that's when I do my best thinking).
So, if your company creates a policy that blacks are not welcome in your company, you will be ok with that too? How about people who eat too much? Do they have a urine test for chocolate consumption too? The last time I checked, both cigarettes and chocolate are legal products?
Unbelievable!!!!!!
Heaven help you if you get caught with a contraband twinkie in your lunch box !
If an employee wanted to quit because of something his boss did in his personal time, should he be forced to keep his job with the company, or is it ok for him to quit?
Brilliant.
Nobody around here seems to get that.
Different thing entirely. Race is protected under the Civil Rights Act of (IIRC) 1967. Discriminating based on race is suicidal from a legal standpoint and a public relations standpoint.
How about people who eat too much? Do they have a urine test for chocolate consumption too? The last time I checked, both cigarettes and chocolate are legal products?
That's my call as an employer. If you don't like it, find another job or start your own company. Also, airlines and the entertainment industry have the legal right to discriminate based on weight and body mass. A 400lb person can't navigate the narrow aisle of an airplane, and the same person wouldn't look good in a bikini on the cover of Sports Illustrated. Those things fall under the BFOQ (bona fide occupational qualification) statutes.
That's the key you mean?
I guess the Equal Employment Opportunity rules are just going to have to be expanded now, aren't they?
"Interrogative?"
Declarative.
About 5 years ago all Michigan laws forbidding dueling were rescinded.
You are exactly right. And if good workers don't want to work for you, you pay the price in the marketplace. If better workers DO want to work for you because of your policies, you win.
It's a little thing we call freedom and property rights.
That's where we're headed, I reckon'.....
If a condition of employment runs twenty-four hours a day, shouldn't the employee be paid for a twenty-four hour day?
Not sure about the redheads only policy, since that has racil implications, but otherwise I agree.
You don't think they should be allowed to fire people for those first two? Those aren't even off-time activities, they are things that directly affect the work environment and the atmosphere/image of the company.
No, "you must not use tobacco", to "You must take a shower in this room with concrete soap, and zyklon-B showerheads."
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.