Skip to comments.
‘Smokers hut’ plan sparks debate
Spokesman Review ^
| 05/20/2004
| Rob McDonald
Posted on 05/20/2004 9:30:16 PM PDT by writer33
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-24 last
To: writer33
Well, ya know, in some places it's completely legal to deny smokers employment. What do you expect?
21
posted on
05/21/2004 8:44:23 AM PDT
by
Chad Fairbanks
(You make me feel warm all over. No...wait...I'm soaking in a puddle of my own urine.)
To: metesky
Next it will be licenses allowing the bearer to shoot any smoker that steps outside the shelter while still smoking.They better be a good shot cause I'll be shooting back.
22
posted on
05/21/2004 8:53:40 AM PDT
by
Just another Joe
(Warning: FReeping can be addictive and helpful to your mental health)
To: sweetliberty
Personally, I think the cost should be born by the people doing the complaining.Now you're talkin'.
Whine-fine funded Smoker's Huts of the Future:
To: Chad Fairbanks
Well, ya know, in some places it's completely legal to deny smokers employment. In Delaware it is perfectly OK to ask if an applicant smokes and deny them a job they are qualified for because of that - unless it is a State job they are applying for.
There is a major push to forbid this practice when it comes to those with "real or perceived" sexual orientations in the PRIVATE sector.
I'm so thankful I don't live in Delaware any longer.
24
posted on
05/21/2004 2:19:36 PM PDT
by
Gabz
(Ted Kennedy's car has killed more people than my second hand smoke.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-24 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson