This could be interesting. He should claim that the nicotine got there from second hand smoke. Then we can break out the popcorn while the company lawyers call to the stand expert witnesses who testify that the second hand smoke danger is a myth, and defense lawyers counter with experts who swear it is a clear and present danger. This trial can have no bad outcome. If the defense wins the guy gets his job back plus back pay. If the company wins the second hand smoke myth is blown sky high.
And I was thinking snuff or chewing tobacco.
Does Scotts have a policy against smokeless tobacco?
I'm betting they do.
He could argue that it was there from nicotine gum, couldn't he? What if he were using it to quit?
I know that contracts are there for this reason, but it does bother me a bit. And I don't smoke.