Not hiring smokers?

T

tekkychick

New member
Although I don't smoke, and I don't like cigarettes or their smell and don't want to be near them, and though I am thrilled that in California there are very few public places where people are allowed to smoke....

I DON'T agree that businesses should be allowed to not hire someone simply because they smoke. If they do it on their own time, it's their business. Businesses can control what we do at work; they should not be able to dictate what we do outside of it. If we are doing the job we were hired for, that's all they should concern themselves about.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/28/pennsylvania-hospitals-ban-smokers-hiring_n_3517549.html

With just days to go before two of the city's most prestigious hospitals refuse to hire smokers, the ban has relit a debate about the wisdom of regulating workers' behavior away from the workplace.

Both the highly rated University of Pennsylvania Health System, which includes the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, as well as the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, named by US News and World Report as America's top children's hospital this year, will join dozens of hospitals across the country when they implement their policy on Monday, July 1.

The move has generated criticism among civil liberties activists, hospital employees and even doctors who fear that smokers will lie about their habit - and therefore become less likely to seek help in stopping it.
Click to expand...
 
tekkychick said:
Although I don't smoke, and I don't like cigarettes or their smell and don't want to be near them, and though I am thrilled that in California there are very few public places where people are allowed to smoke....

I DON'T agree that businesses should be allowed to not hire someone simply because they smoke. If they do it on their own time, it's their business. Businesses can control what we do at work; they should not be able to dictate what we do outside of it. If we are doing the job we were hired for, that's all they should concern themselves about.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/28/pennsylvania-hospitals-ban-smokers-hiring_n_3517549.html
Click to expand...

Freedom of association. Businesses can hire whomever they want for whatever reason they want.
 
As a smoker, I'm ok with it; primarily because of the employer's investment in the employee's health and productivity.
 
LORD of the FISHFLYS said:
Freedom of association. Businesses can hire whomever they want for whatever reason they want.
Click to expand...

They aren't allowed to discriminate based on race, gender and (in some states) sexual orientation. So no, they can't just hire or choose not to hire based on personal preference.

Today it's smoking; and many companies, of course, have drug tests. Tomorrow will they be watching what we eat, what we drink, whether we exercise, etc etc etc?
 
tekkychick said:
Although I don't smoke, and I don't like cigarettes or their smell and don't want to be near them, and though I am thrilled that in California there are very few public places where people are allowed to smoke....

I DON'T agree that businesses should be allowed to not hire someone simply because they smoke. If they do it on their own time, it's their business. Businesses can control what we do at work; they should not be able to dictate what we do outside of it. If we are doing the job we were hired for, that's all they should concern themselves about.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/28/pennsylvania-hospitals-ban-smokers-hiring_n_3517549.html
Click to expand...

Smokers cost businesses a lot of money in extra breaks. Maybe there is a more mature answer but a business is a business and owned by the owner. If it's a State or Federal building, it would have something to do with these forums and more debateable.
 
Can carry it further - what if they only hire same sex couples because they tend to have fewer babies than heterosexual couples and thus will save them medical expenses?
 
tekkychick said:
They aren't allowed to discriminate based on race, gender and (in some states) sexual orientation. So no, they can't just hire or choose not to hire based on personal preference.

Today it's smoking; and many companies, of course, have drug tests. Tomorrow will they be watching what we eat, what we drink, whether we exercise, etc etc etc?
Click to expand...
Tomorrow, lol
They started five years ago in big corporations
 
LORD of the FISHFLYS said:
Freedom of association. Businesses can hire whomever they want for whatever reason they want.
Click to expand...

Freedom of association within capitalism is a myth propagated by the oppressing classes. Billy, if a worker simply chooses not to take a job, they don't eat. If a capitalist simply chooses not to hire workers, their business fails.
 
tekkychick said:
Can carry it further - what if they only hire same sex couples because they tend to have fewer babies than heterosexual couples and thus will save them medical expenses?
Click to expand...

Take the logical step - take a stand against capitalists in general. None of these problems would exist if we radically changed our labor model.
 
tekkychick said:
Can carry it further - what if they only hire same sex couples because they tend to have fewer babies than heterosexual couples and thus will save them medical expenses?
Click to expand...

Oh snap! You went there.

I was going to say smoking is a danger to your health, but we know the HIV statistics.

This is a profiling argument and I'm out. Both parties do it and both are critical when the other does.

I would have to take the default where the business owner has the right to make any decision he/she wants. When the gays set up a picket and make news, Chick-a-Filet had good business for 1 day, then sales tanked.
 
tekkychick said:
so you're ok if a business chooses not to hire women? or African Americans?
Click to expand...

I'm not ok with that, but I won't use the form of Government to fight it. I would use a union of citizens to fight it. And I will admit, this doesn't always work. Oil Fracking is still happening, but it is because the Right made it impossible to stop it when Bush use the Government to do so.

So the political debate is "less gov vs. more gov" but ironically, the party that stands for less gov tends to abuse the power of gov more, lately anyway.

The PEOPLE have the power and never give the government more power than you would trust Hitler with. Otherwise the paranoid morons will go crazy and worst case scenario, worst case scenario happens..........such as the government knows what I'm typing right now.
 
tekkychick said:
so you're ok if a business chooses not to hire women? or African Americans?
Click to expand...

Ok in its their right to choose whom they associate with sure. Not ok in the sense that I'd refuse to do business with them. I also have a policy in avoiding companies that are known to hire morons, especially banks.
 
Rose said:
Freedom of association within capitalism is a myth propagated by the oppressing classes. Billy, if a worker simply chooses not to take a job, they don't eat. If a capitalist simply chooses not to hire workers, their business fails.
Click to expand...

Well you don't believe in private property, which goes hand in hand with freedom of association, therefore we already begin this argument at an impasse.
 
Rose said:
Hmm? I do indeed believe in freedom of association - I just don't believe it exists on any reasonable scale within a capitalist economy.
Click to expand...

Well like you said, if a business doesn't hire or cater to a certain segment then they may lose money and fail. That's how it works.
 
Rose said:
Freedom of association within capitalism is a myth propagated by the oppressing classes. Billy, if a worker simply chooses not to take a job, they don't eat. If a capitalist simply chooses not to hire workers, their business fails.
Click to expand...

The freedom to choose is not necessarily about a choice between associating with everyone and or no one. It is about choosing your associates on a case by case basis. An employee has many potential employers and an employer has many potential employees to choose from.
 
LORD of the FISHFLYS said:
Well like you said, if a business doesn't hire or cater to a certain segment then they may lose money and fail. That's how it works.
Click to expand...

Like how the rich use to give the poor pennies in the depression. The rich business owners who lived the high life chose from the crowds who they thought was the best worker for the day to earn one or two pennies. But if the hard workers got mad, or maybe grouped together to require more than just pennies, It would mean we live in AMERICA. AND WE HAVE BEEN THROUGH THIS BEFORE.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top