Posted on 10/04/2002 12:04:04 AM PDT by SheLion
Edited on 05/26/2004 5:09:12 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
A top Housing Authority official has smoked himself out of an $80,000-a-year job.
After consulting with the mayor's office, Housing chairman Tino Hernandez yesterday ordered the immediate firing of Robert Swinton, the deputy director of the Office of Facility Planning, one of five employees spotted by a Post reporter last week in extended smoking sessions outside the agency's headquarters at 250 Broadway.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
In fact, Joe, where Hubby works, when the smokers run out to grab a break, the non-smokers go with them just to stretch their legs. So not every non-smoker hates us.
Your sure right!
The Congressional Research Service, in the 1998 revision of their study found: Smokers cost the federal government $9 billion in medical care and $10 billion in lost contributions to social security, etc. But they also found they save $40 billion in retirement costs (mostly social security), about $8 billion in nursing home costs (mostly from Medicaid), and they collect $5.6 billion in cigarette taxes. When added up, smokers saved the federal government $34.6 billion dollars yearly.
State governments saved money too. After subtracting net medical costs of $1.5 billion and $1.8 billion from lost contributions from a savings of $4.8 billion in nursing home costs financed through Medicaid and $.6 billion in retirement savings, and $7.6 billion in cigarette taxes, smokers saved the states almost $9.7 billion.
Save my seat!
reduce productivity - If smoking had such an impact on productivity, as you claim, there should be droves of unemployed smokers out there looking for jobs...I don't see that...at all. Like any good businessman, if an employee is not producing you fire him...regardless of whether of not they smoke.
increase insurance costs - smokers have not been the cause of rising health care costs within recent history. I argue, that there was probably alot more smokers the period of the 1940's to the 1970's per capita then there are now, and health care(in general) and health care costs were alot more reasonable back then. Increased health costs have more to do with the overregulation of health care by the fed gov (i.e. mandated benefits, HMO's), overtaxation (Medicare and Medicaid) and ambulance-chasing malpractice attorneys.
drive away good employees - an empty-handed statement...if your a "good" employee, your at your job simply to do the best job you can, make your $$$ and go home. A good employee focuses his efforts on his JOB...not whether or not JoeBlow is outside smoking.
It sounds like you could be charged with violating the Americans with Disabilities Act if you follow these edicts.
If the employer wants to fire the employee for being away from their desk for 69 minutes per day, that's appropriate, too. The problem is that they're mandating him to be away from his desk to smoke. To be fair, they should find some way to ensure that the worker can still be productive while they are reoved from the working area... outside phone calling, smoker-only workrooms, and mundane manual labor duties immediately come to mind. (No help for the nico-fiend teachers, though!)
As stated above, it was making smoking verboten in the workplace that has caused these problems. Repeal that rule, and most of the issues go away. Unfortunately we have a populace and a bureaucracy that both demand that laws and regulations settle all disputes, rather than intelligence, social skills, and diplomacy.
It's only politicians who think that....... or pretend to.
They still lived to a ripe old age.
Thank you.
LOL, Which is what she should have done in the first place.
What if he'd/they'd be heroin addicts?
YOU know the answer.
LOL......I *could* comment on that. But, wouldn't be prudent. Nope. Wouldn't be prudent.
I started smoking at 19 and my lungs at 55 are clear! Of course I stopped smoking at 19. Your post means nothing.
hmmmmm sounds like he is a segregator.......isn't that illegal?
LOL......I *could* comment on that. But, wouldn't be prudent. Nope. Wouldn't be prudent.
Like Great Dane said: you can't DO that at work. 
What do you mean, the post means nothing?! After smoking all those years, and his lungs are still clear. I think that speaks volumes..
I worked with a guy who..................ohhh...better not say.
:-)
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.