Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Is it fair to reject job applicants who smoke? (Poll to freep)
Morning Call ^ | 3/31/2010 | Staff

Posted on 03/31/2010 3:39:19 AM PDT by Red in Blue PA

A local hospital is not allowing smokers to apply for positions, deeming them too high of a health cost. What is next? Downhill skiing? Skydiving?

This intrusion into our personal lives should not stand,but amazingly, many even here on FR< support this!

(Excerpt) Read more at mcall.com ...


TOPICS: Miscellaneous
KEYWORDS: freep; lossoffreedom; nannystate; poll; smoking
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-76 next last

1 posted on 03/31/2010 3:39:19 AM PDT by Red in Blue PA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Red in Blue PA

A private business should be able to reject any applicant for any reason except race, gender or age.

Several companies didn’t permit employees to have facial hair until recently.

I would not hire a smoker especially in a healthcare setting.

Since when did smoking become a “right” on the job?


2 posted on 03/31/2010 3:43:09 AM PDT by TSgt (When the government fears the people, there is liberty. - Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red in Blue PA

Employers should be able to discriminate against downhill skiers and skydivers too.

Employment is a contract based on a set of terms. Is is your “right” to show up to work in only your underwear even though you can legally dress this way at home?

Don’t think so...


3 posted on 03/31/2010 3:45:38 AM PDT by TSgt (When the government fears the people, there is liberty. - Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MikeWUSAF
Since when did smoking become a “right” on the job?

Since when did having a job become an Orwellian nightmare?

What's next? Cameras in every home to watch your moves to prove what you say? I am sure many would approve of that.
4 posted on 03/31/2010 3:49:39 AM PDT by Red in Blue PA (Thinking of using 911 for protection? Google "Brittany Zimmerman")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Red in Blue PA

Company’s should be allowed to not hire women of child bearing age, since they might get pregnant. That’s costly you know.

/s


5 posted on 03/31/2010 3:50:45 AM PDT by revtown
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MikeWUSAF

People who like this must also like obamacare. Both are horribly intrusive into one’s personal life.


6 posted on 03/31/2010 3:51:01 AM PDT by Red in Blue PA (Thinking of using 911 for protection? Google "Brittany Zimmerman")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: MikeWUSAF
A private business should be able to reject any applicant for any reason except race, gender or age.

Funny how:

race now includes illegal aliens
gender includes transexuals
age, well, just relocate the business outside the US, LOL.

7 posted on 03/31/2010 3:52:24 AM PDT by donna (SarahPAC has donated money to...(wait for it)...Lindsey Graham!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Red in Blue PA

drink?..is next


8 posted on 03/31/2010 3:52:27 AM PDT by Doogle (USAF.68-73..8th TFW Ubon Thailand..never store a threat you should have eliminated)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MikeWUSAF

The argument is that smokers cost too much. What about people in wheelca=hairs then?

Where does this (very) slippery slope end? And don’t say the courts. With obamacare and libs on many benches, some courts may approve of not employing those in wheelchairs.


9 posted on 03/31/2010 3:52:32 AM PDT by Red in Blue PA (Thinking of using 911 for protection? Google "Brittany Zimmerman")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Doogle

That would be my thinking. They’ll be telling you how many drinks you can have and then testing you Monday morning.

(the truly scary part is that many here would agree with this too)


10 posted on 03/31/2010 3:53:32 AM PDT by Red in Blue PA (Thinking of using 911 for protection? Google "Brittany Zimmerman")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Red in Blue PA

but but but it’s good for you


11 posted on 03/31/2010 3:54:40 AM PDT by Doogle (USAF.68-73..8th TFW Ubon Thailand..never store a threat you should have eliminated)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Red in Blue PA

As a fellow employee, I’ve noticed people who smoke take many more “breaks” during the day than the non-smoking employee. If I were an employer, I’d lay down policy about smoking breaks.

But one of the reasons a small business owner might not want to accept smokers is their insurance costs will rise if there are smokers on their policy.


12 posted on 03/31/2010 3:56:56 AM PDT by dawn53
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MikeWUSAF

Is not hiring older workers due to health care costs, age discrimination? /sarc


13 posted on 03/31/2010 3:57:47 AM PDT by EBH (Our First Right...."it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it,")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: dawn53; All

To anyone who supports this, remember that when they come for something you like.

Like going to the beach? Laying on the beach is verboten! Cancer risk you know.

Like downhill skiing? Verboten! Risk of injury or death.

A drink or two? Verboten! And we will test you.

Travel to Cairo to see the Pyramids for 2 weeks? Too much pollution. Try another city.

Anyone who laughs at any of these things really has not thought this through.


14 posted on 03/31/2010 4:00:18 AM PDT by Red in Blue PA (Thinking of using 911 for protection? Google "Brittany Zimmerman")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: MikeWUSAF
A private business should be able to reject any applicant for any reason except race, gender sex, or age.

I owned a Thai restaurant. I didn't hire smokers because I didn't want the "extra" on the clock breaks, or the more frequent "sick" calls.
Nor did I want to subject my customers, other employees, or myself to the stink.

Firefighters aren't allowed facial hair. It interferes with a proper fit for their SCBA.

A "Right" is something the founding fathers deemed important enough to kill to maintain. They wisely listed those things in a document as a warning to would be tyrants.
Sadly we now have become so whimpified that we tolerate the tyrant.

15 posted on 03/31/2010 4:04:55 AM PDT by ASA Vet (Iran should have ceased to exist Nov 5, 1979, but we had no president then either.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: dawn53

“As a fellow employee, I’ve noticed people who smoke take many more “breaks” during the day than the non-smoking employee. If I were an employer, I’d lay down policy about smoking breaks.”

I work at a very large company. I’ve noticed people of a certain ethinicity that take many more “breaks” than others. Should I be allowed to discriminate based on race?


16 posted on 03/31/2010 4:06:28 AM PDT by caver (Obama: Home of the Whopper)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Red in Blue PA

I usually agree with everything you say, but in this one I have to agree with those that say it is a private business and they should have the right to hire how they wish to hire.

For this same reason I don’t support the Smokefree laws. If I as a business want to have a bar where smoking is allowed, why can’t I? And then hire only smokers to work?


17 posted on 03/31/2010 4:08:32 AM PDT by Dan Nunn (Some of us are wise, some of us are otherwise. -The Great One)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: MikeWUSAF
Since when did smoking become a “right” on the job?

This is about smoking at home, enforced by blood tests.

18 posted on 03/31/2010 4:11:21 AM PDT by Lucius Cornelius Sulla (Pray for my soul. More things are wrought by prayer Than this world dreams of.-- Idylls of the King)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Dan Nunn; All
they should have the right to hire how they wish to hire.

My question is where does this end? People are doing a LEGAL act in their FREE TIME and at the same time getting punished for it.

It's not a stretch to now have companies tell you how many drinks you have in your free time, tell you what roads you can drive on or must avoid, and even where you can travel.
19 posted on 03/31/2010 4:11:31 AM PDT by Red in Blue PA (Thinking of using 911 for protection? Google "Brittany Zimmerman")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: MikeWUSAF

My employees must all be female, and willing to sleep with me on demand.


20 posted on 03/31/2010 4:11:50 AM PDT by Mr Ramsbotham (A gentleman in the drawing room; a rapist in the boudoir.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-76 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson