Posted on 12/23/2005 7:13:34 AM PST by Millee
SACKED smoker Sophie Blinman threatened to take her former employers to court yesterday, fuming: "I'm furious. Surely this is discrimination."
Stunned Sophie, 21, was given the boot 45 minutes after starting her new job even though she promised not to light up in office hours.
Her bosses declared: "It's positive discrimination and we're proud of it." Experts agreed the company was not breaking the law. But smokers' pressure group Forest said: "This is outrageous."
Sophie, who smokes five to 10 cigarettes a day, was delighted to land her £6-an-hour job as an administrator at Dataflow Communications.
She said: "I dressed smartly, arrived in good time and was about to be taken on a tour of the offices when I was asked if I smoked. When I said I did, I immediately sensed a problem.
"I explained I'd happily wait until my lunch break to smoke, and leave the premises to do so. But I was told the company didn't employ smokers and there was no longer a position for me.
"I can't believe a business is allowed to have a policy against employing smokers. I was never even asked at my interview if I smoked."
Threatening legal action, Sophie, of Shepton Mallet, Somerset, added: "This has left me angered and unemployed. I shall be seeking legal advice."
Dataflow, which employs 20 workers at its offices in Wells, advertises its non-smokers policy on its website.
Managing director Fran Edwards said: "All our employees have been recruited on this basis. We can't make an exception."
Information Services boss Ian Murray added: "We didn't ask Sophie at her interview if she was a smoker because we assumed the agency that sent her only asked non-smokers to apply."
Employment lawyer Frank Ryan said: "This is unusual, but it doesn't breach the law. Sophie won't qualify for unfair dismissal but she might challenge on the grounds of human rights."
Forest said: "Only smokers can be discriminated against without penalty."
I thought (rich) Republicans owned the businesses.
In Kentucky, Smokers are a protected class. Smokers Anti-Discrimination Act...1994 or some where around that date.
Well you are going to have a hard time arguing a smoker... which is a person who has defined themselves by an activity they choose to engage in... is the equivalent to a person who is born with a certain color skin. Trying to is ludicrous and insulting.
"And how exactly would you react to being fired for being a Republican?"
Well, when that happened to me, I started my own business (same competitive area), and drove the guy who fired me into bankruptcy in 15 months. Bought up his remaining assets at about five cents on the dollar. The REALLY good part was that his house got foreclosed on Christmas Eve. Ho, ho, ho, mother******! :)
Well then in Kentucky have to worry about it, but under federal law, they aren't.
Well yes if she's a lipstick lesbian not a mullet lesbian. We have SOME standards.
JMHO.
We smokers should start businesses and open resturaunts and bars that hire and cater to only smokers.
I know we'd be shut down in about five minutes, but it'd send a message.
Ping.
(I still think we should randomly spread tobacco seeds everywhere we can)
No it's called freedom of association. Something that used to exist in this nation of states before federal regulation forced employers to accept anyone and anything against their will. The intent under the Constitution was not meant to apply to private companies but only a list of limitations of the national government
Challenge.
In my business I would be laughed at for taking time off for something as simple as a cold.
In my experience, singles take far more sick days (aka "really bad hangover days") and personal days (aka "I just broke up with my boyfriend days") than parents do.
Do you snow ski? Skydive? Race cars? Climb mountains? Oh, we can't have any employees with these lifestyle choices that affect health care costs! You're fired!
No ... the 3% who are anal'ers are politically protected.
the 25% who smoke need to learn from that 3%.
Oh well.. that's life. Get fired, get another job, or better yet, start your own company... hard to get fired, when you are the owner.
Nope, I believe they have a right to not hire who they don't want to. And I have a right to hate them for their prejudice and secretly hope that a jury agrees with the lady and awards a huge penalty. See how that works?
It's hard to lie about smoking and get away with it.
There's a big difference ... some people give up one perfectly secure position to be hired for another.
Do you believe that it's OK for an employer to maliciously uproot an individual simply because he/she smokes?
"Positive Discrimination" is "Affirmative Action" stated another way.. same thing.. very logical to those with Moonbats in their belfry.. Some lawyer(s) could make a name for himself attacking this.. for if one is wrong so is the other.. exactly the same mentality advocating both..
IMHO, a business should be "allowed" to hire and fire whomever they want - but the firing should only be "for cause" - that is, work-related reasons. If I choose to bugger badgers on the weekend and catch some exotic disease, that's my business - yes, even if the business is paying for my health care. Unless they make it a condition of my employment spelled out at the acceptance of the job offer that I cannot bugger badgers, then they have no right to fire me for doing that on my own time.
We can't all be business owners - someone has to be the employees.
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.