Replies

Your father was one of the few lucky ones. My Fatehr-in-law quit smoking at age 55 and died at age 56 seven months later.

You seem to argue that your Fater is the average smoker far from it. He is very lucky to still be alive.

My main point is a person should not be forced to smoke just to get a job, not even second hand smoke, unless the sole purpose of the establishment is selling smokes. Also bars are a common place for after work parties. Employees should not have to attend parties around smokers. Yet not attending is often a good way to get fired. Does that employee really have a choice?

A Cigar Shop can and should allow smoking as long as it's main business is selling Tobacco. That is the single exception although a tobacco plant could argue for the same right. I once refused a job for R J Renolds because they allowed employees to somke. In fact the cigarettes were often provided free or very cheep. I shouldn't have to refuse a job elsewhere for that reason though.

"Your father was one of the few lucky ones."

I agree, he absolutely is one of the "lucky ones". But he is only in the position to be considered "lucky" (not to have gotten cancer) because HE chose to smoke in the first place!

Someone who never smokes isn't "lucky" not to get lung cancer or emphysema or whatever, they CHOSE not to take the chance.

Yet not attending is often a good way to get firedMaybe you have a point here, but how many people have ever been fired for NOT attending a company party? Fired for doing something in a drunken stupor at a company party? Sure, but for not showing up? I think you're reaching a bit to make an argument there.

My main point is a person should not be forced to smoke just to get a job, not even second hand smoke

Who is "forced to smoke just to get a job"? If you're so worried about breathing second-hand smoke, there are plenty of other professions besides bartending and waitering to get into. If you don't like heights, you don't get a job as a high-rise window washer, you do something else. But maybe people like you think we should ban multi-story buildings so that no one will be "forced" to work in a dangerous place.

My main point is a person should not be forced to smoke just to get a job, not even second hand smoke, unless the sole purpose of the establishment is selling smokes. Also bars are a common place for after work parties. Employees should not have to attend parties around smokers. Yet not attending is often a good way to get fired. Does that employee really have a choice?

You have a point - but let's look at it from the other side.

A person shouldn't be forced to quit smoking just to get a job. What in heaven's name is wrong with an establishment that caters to smokers and only hires smokers?

In Delaware it is perfectly legal to refuse to hire someone who smokes, even if only smoke off the job. However, it is also just as legal to choose a smoker over a non-smoker for any job. Can you imagine the outrage if an establish put a help wanted ad in the paper that stated "smokers only need apply"? Yet there is no outrage when the add says "non-smsokers only."

The anti-smoker ban law in Delaware doesn't even permit smoking in tobacco or cigar shops.

You refused to take a job with a company that permits their employees the choice to smoke at work????? Actually I'm surprised you would even have considered a job with a company that makes cigarettes in the first place.

Your experience with your father-in-law is saddening and tragic, and I offer my belated condolences. However, your experience notwithstanding - most smokers do not die because of smoking at young ages.

The CDC promotes the 400,000+ "premature" deaths due to smoking all the time, but really without any basis. If one looks at the numbers the majority of so-called 'smoking-related' deaths occur well after 65.

But the biggest thing with this so-called number of 'premature' deaths is that they really have no idea how the number is derived. There is some computer program that is fed a number of deaths per annum and an estimated number of smokers and it spits out some number.

Who in their right mind can truly accept a figure of 400,000+ PREMATURE annual deaths are due to tobacco, when the fact is more than 20% of these occur past the age of 75 and there is NOT one single solitary name to account for any of them???????