how do you feel about a company that does not hire smokers?

Question

Note the bottom line in this article

http://health.yahoo.com/news/175690

personally as a non smoker I like the idea... but I would like to see other peoples opinions

edit** I have to add that if you think about it smokers are more likely to be out sick becuase their immune system is working harder, they can develop lung cancer and die more likely then a non smokeing employee... I personally would rather have an employee that I knew was going to be around longer... not to mention the smoking breaks that can get out of hand... I have friends whos only reason for not quitting is "I can't think of working without having the chance for a cigarette break every hour or so" you know what us non smokers have to do it why cant you :-P

Answer 1

I love it. Smokers are nasty I do not want to be subjected to their astray funk.
They take too many breaks to smoke. Thats why my company did it. Their obsessive smoking behavior is their own damn crutch.

Answer 2

I do not agree. Smoking is legal and a right. Why don't we go back to prohibition? Because anyone who drinks would have a fit. Anyway, that company is the exception, since it IS the WHO. But I imagine it they can do it, then hospitals and other health care service providers will be next. Problem is, how are you to know someone isn't lying? You won't, and if my job invades my privacy to find out then that is another serious problem.

And for people who are saying that second hand smoke is worse than smoking...wake up and stop believing the crap they tell you.

I partially agree with you Unik. But I, and other smokers I know don't and can't take more breaks than allowed. I am perfectly healthy and see more people (smokers or not) with physical ailments go home early or call in sick because their legs hurt constantly, back aches constantly, want to take a 3 or 4 day mini-vacation, abuse leave for all sorts of reasons other than because of the fact they smoke. I'm not saying smoking doesn't make you more susceptable to illness, I'm just saying there are many other types of illness that contribute to missed work. Believe me, I'd love to quit, and I'm trying. But unless you understand what this addiction is like I can't make you understand. Smoking doesn't make you a bad person but the media sure is trying to portray it that way. There have been geniuses and great leaders who have smoked and continue to. I wouldn't be surprised if this goes to the Supreme Court with companies in the US.

Answer 3

I want to see your statistics on how smokers are the only people who are more likely to be out sick. Some smokers aren't sick a day in their lives. I don't think THAT point is relevant. I am a smoker, I take my cigarette break when I get my break. I don't take extra time. When I didn't smoke I would tell my boss (if smokers can go outside for smoke breaks I want to go outside for fresh air breaks) see how fast those every hour on the hour breaks stop. Cigarette smoke isn't the only pollutant in the air, and I wish people would stop making it out to be that way. You can not discriminate on who you hire. It's illegal for you to choose who's in your work place by race, creed, sex, and it should not matter if they smoke or not. BUT- I can argue this until I am blue in the face- just like Abortion, so I'm going to chill...

**GOOD QUESTION, THOUGH**

Answer 4

My feelings are pretty mixed on the matter. I am a nonsmoker and I wish all smokers could quit but I don't want to force them into it. I think that it is a terrible thing when an employer can govern your legal activities outside of the workplace. What's next, banning Twinkie eaters?
Having said that, I have to admit that I prefer to not work with smokers whenever possible. I can't stand the smell and they get anxious and irritable if breaks are delayed.

Answer 5

As a non-smoker, I would say 'Hurray' but then on the other hand the policy does look a bit discriminating. If people want or don't want to smoke, that is their right, isn't it?

Answer 6

Here in Florida, only a few weeks in the past, 2 Daytona Beach firemen and a Police Officer have been all fired for checking out constructive for tobacco. They have a no tolerance rule for it. One of the men had over twenty years provider. Sad.

Answer 7

They're just COVERING THEIR "BOTTOM LINE"... since, SMOKERS are a SIGNIFICANT LIABILITY... for, HEALTH REASONS... and, OTHERS!!!

Personally... I DON'T THINK... the GOVERNMENT or OTHERS... should LEGISLATE... the LIFESTYLE CHOICES of OTHERS... but then... THE CONSTITUTION NO LONGER has ANY MERIT... so, LEGISLATE AWAY!!!

BESIDES... it's ALL the TOBACCO INDUSTRY'S FAULT... it they WOULD HAVE LEFT TOBACCO... THE "WAY" it's found IN NATURE... INSTEAD OF "SCIENTIFICALLY ENHANCING" THINGS... people WOULDN'T BE as ADDICTED to it... and, THERE WOULDN'T BE... "THE PROBLEM" with SMOKING and HEALTH PROBLEMS... that WE HAVE TODAY!!!

The AMERICAN INDIANS smoked it, in it's NATURAL STATE... and, they DIDN'T GET ADDICTED TO IT!!!

so, THERE YOU HAVE IT... the, UN-BIASED OPINION of ONE INDIVIDUAL... not affiliated with BIG TOBACCO... or, THOSE WHO WOULD "LITIGATE" the LIFESTYLE CHOICES of OTHERS... until, HELL FREEZES OVER!!!

Answer 8

Great Idea people should think just how much of their money paid in taxes is being used up treating smoking related illnesses.~~

Answer 9

I like the idea.
Smoking is expensive and physically destructive for more than just the smoker.

Answer 10

I dont think its right at all people have the right to smoke if they want and if people dont like it then oh well. Thats really discrimanation and is not right at all.