I'm a smoker and an employer. I'm going to side with Scott's on this. If that's their policy, then it was legal discrimination since smokers don't fall into a protected class. I can discriminate against people who shave, people who don't shave, people who are bald, people who have long hair, people who wear jewelry, people who wash with Dial soap, people who think Hillary Clinton is hot, etc. As long as I don't discriminate based on age, gender, race, national origin, religion, Vietnam vet status, disability, or sexual orientation (certain states), then it's my right as a private employer to make that call. If you don't like it, find another job.
Yeppers. Spot on.
Okay, let's follow that logic...non-protected "classes"...how about if I refuse to hire anyone who DOESN'T smoke? You think that stands a snowball's chance in hell of standing up in court????
You are exactly right. And if good workers don't want to work for you, you pay the price in the marketplace. If better workers DO want to work for you because of your policies, you win.
It's a little thing we call freedom and property rights.
If you're willing to pay someone for 24/7 employment, then you get to set the rules in his of hours. We're employees, not freaking slaves.
It's a LEGAL substance like alcohol. You can tell them no smoking on the clock and that's kosher. Telling someone no smoking ever, or no alcohol, or no guns, or no motorcycles ever while they work for you is a no-no.
Think of the precedent that you are setting and then think of ANY habit/hobby you might have that could be used against you.