Skip to comments.
SACKED AND I'M FUMING (Fired for smoking)
The Mirror ^
| 12/23/05
| Richard Smith
Posted on 12/23/2005 7:13:34 AM PST by Millee
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 181-194 next last
To: Millee
Let's see do they ask any of the other detrimental lifestyle questions....
are you and alcoholic
are you a drug addict
do you sleep with anything that comes by striking your fancy
do you just cast off and not use seat belts
are you an overeater (LARDBUTT that needs Omar the Tent-maker as a seamstress)
Guess those would be intolerant to ask. Her barrister should point out the attitude inconsistency when the young lady gets her case before the Crown's Court.
41
posted on
12/23/2005 7:42:04 AM PST
by
SandRat
(Duty, Honor, Country. What else needs to be said?)
To: xrp
I'm not a Republican, but if I were and I were fired for it, I guess I'd have to find another job. YOU? I guess I'd be like this guy ...
... and just burn down the building.
THEN go find another job.
42
posted on
12/23/2005 7:44:30 AM PST
by
Centurion2000
((Aubrey, Tx) --- America, we get the best government corporations can buy.)
To: fizziwig
Wait until they do genetic testing. Got a predisposition for heart disease? Cancer? Mental illness? Good luck getting a job, or at least a job with any health benefits. Off to the shower rooms with you!
43
posted on
12/23/2005 7:46:14 AM PST
by
FlyVet
To: Semper Paratus
Homosexual sex is not unhealthy behavior. It may shorten your life by 20 years, but it is quite healthy according to political correctness.
Pray for W and Our Victorious Troops
44
posted on
12/23/2005 7:47:20 AM PST
by
bray
(Merry Christmas Iraq)
To: Paloma_55
She should get the ACLU to help her out. Smoking is not wrong, it is an alternative way of breathing. She is a victim. She needs understanding. They are smokophobic. Actually I think that might fly!
45
posted on
12/23/2005 7:47:35 AM PST
by
Rummyfan
To: Millee
Hotsy-Totsy, more little Nazis.
46
posted on
12/23/2005 7:48:45 AM PST
by
TexasRepublic
(BALLISTIC CATHARSIS: perforating uncooperative objects with chunks of lead)
To: Centurion2000
You wouldn't go to the beach and get mai tais and margaritas without the salt?
47
posted on
12/23/2005 7:49:04 AM PST
by
xrp
(Conservative votes are to Republicans what 90% of black votes are to Democrats (taken for granted))
To: Millee
She should have been asked in the interview whether she smoked or not.I'd bet it was. I wouldn't just take her word for it.
I've been on a lot of interviews with smoke free companies, I've seen their ads in the paper, and it's always mentioned if they fell this strongly about it.
FWIW... I smoke, and I've hidden that fact before for employment. But that was my risk and I knew it. I think this lady did too. Hey - it was her first day and they fired her because they smelled it on her. At least they didn't fire her after knowing about it for some time.
48
posted on
12/23/2005 7:49:25 AM PST
by
HairOfTheDog
(Join the Hobbit Hole Troop Support - http://freeper.the-hobbit-hole.net/ 1,000 knives and counting!)
To: Go Gordon
Non-homosexual only hiring? Non-religeous people only hiring? Non-alcohol consuming people only? Non-fast food eating people only? Non-fat people only? Non-perfume/cologne using people only?As the freedom-loving (ha!) man in the article stated:
"It's positive discrimination and we're proud of it."
To: fizziwig
Yes, this has all either happened or will happen in the Orwellian world that has arrived. Inappropriate label and comparison. Orwell's 1984 had to do with government. This is a private employer that wishes to set certain criteria on who will be hired vs who will not be hired, absent government interference. Any true conservative should support any employer who choses not to employ smokers.
50
posted on
12/23/2005 7:53:42 AM PST
by
xrp
(Conservative votes are to Republicans what 90% of black votes are to Democrats (taken for granted))
To: fizziwig
My first reaction was that this was outrageous.
Then as I read through the comments, I realized that my reaction was wrong if you believe in freedom. Maybe they handled it badly because it wasn't clear they didn't hire smokers, but shouldn't the employer have the right to hire only those he wants to hire -- for any reason, no matter how ridiculous or how discriminatory others might perceive that decision?
Whose job is it anyway? The worker's or the employer's?
51
posted on
12/23/2005 7:54:32 AM PST
by
Badray
(Limited constitutional government means protection for all, but favor for none.)
To: HamiltonJay
Sorry smokers... SMOKING/SMOKERS are not a "protected class" under the law.. IT is not illegal, at least under federal law to turn away someone because they smoke
In 1920 blacks were not a "protected class" under the law. It was not illegal to turn away someone because they were black.
52
posted on
12/23/2005 7:54:37 AM PST
by
cgbg
(MSM and Democratic treason--fifty years and counting...)
To: Millee
I was doing a job interview once, and the lady I was interviewing asked if I minded if she smoked.
My secretary, a smoker, as was I, said "Hire her Bob, right now". She got the job BECAUSE she smoked.
53
posted on
12/23/2005 7:55:36 AM PST
by
Lokibob
(Spelling and typos are copyrighted. Please do not use.)
To: xrp
I'm not a Republican, but if I were and I were fired for it, I guess I'd have to find another job. YOU? Exactly right. I've been fired more than most people. Sometimes it's been for dubious reasons, but I've never wanted to work for someone that didn't want me there. I always just went and got a new job.
54
posted on
12/23/2005 7:58:57 AM PST
by
Badray
(Limited constitutional government means protection for all, but favor for none.)
To: Paloma_55
Actually, there is a genetic pre-disposition of some people to smoke. Much like the "gay" gene, she is bound by her genetic predisposition to engage in an unhealthy behavior. LOL
55
posted on
12/23/2005 8:01:06 AM PST
by
DBeers
(†)
To: Lokibob
Thank God for folks like you two.
56
posted on
12/23/2005 8:01:22 AM PST
by
RandallFlagg
(Roll your own cigarettes! You'll save $$$ and smoke less!(Magnetic bumper stickers-click my name)
To: wideawake
If you compare the sick time and medical bills of people who have children of school age with those (of the same age) who do not it will be clear that parents take off more sick time than non parents because kids catch a lot of contagious diseases and pass them on to their parents. Should employers refuse to hire parents?
57
posted on
12/23/2005 8:02:10 AM PST
by
cgbg
(MSM and Democratic treason--fifty years and counting...)
To: Go Gordon
Non-homosexual only hiring? Non-religeous people only hiring? Non-alcohol consuming people only? Non-fast food eating people only? Non-fat people only? Non-perfume/cologne using people only? Sounds good to me. Who would be next on the next government dictated must hire list? People who don't speak the language? Can't read or write?
58
posted on
12/23/2005 8:03:14 AM PST
by
lewislynn
(Fairtax= lies, hope, wishful thinking and conjecture.)
To: cgbg
Should employers refuse to hire parents?Sure. If they want. That should be their right.
59
posted on
12/23/2005 8:04:32 AM PST
by
xrp
(Conservative votes are to Republicans what 90% of black votes are to Democrats (taken for granted))
To: wayoverontheright
Right - if it's on the paper she signed (attesting that she'd read and understood and would comply with everything so listed as a 'condition of employment') then "she hasn't a leg to stand upon".
If the "conditions of employment" state something, and everyone else is abiding it with no problem(s), then guess what...? :)
60
posted on
12/23/2005 8:05:13 AM PST
by
solitas
(So what if I support an OS that has fewer flaws than yours? 'Mystic' dual 500 G4's, OSX.4.2)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 181-194 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson