New hiring policy: Prominent hospital will not hire smokers. What do you think?

Question

A prominent world-wide private hospital system has just inacted a new hiring policy where they have stated that they will not be hiring any new employees that use tobacco. They will test all new applicants using Cotinine test which will detect any and all tobacco in the applicant's body. Those who recieve a positive Cotinine test will not be offered employment, but can reapply after 90-days and will be referred to a free tobacco cessation program paid for by the clinic.

What do you think of this? Is it a form of discrimination? If this gains popularity, what will follow? People who are obese will be denied employment?

Note: Though the entire clinic health system (which includes over 15 hospitals, several family clinics, and countless surgery centers and doctor's offices) has always been smoke-free, in the past two years, the entire health system has gone smoke-free, which includes all of the ground the hospital owns. Those who smoke now do so off campus, off any hospital-owned property, which is often expansive.

Another Note: Upon more research, I have found that people who are obese are actually protected under the Americans with Disabilities Act, smoker's are not. (Obviously.)

Answer 1

basically it is foolish... why should a person not be free to do what he prefers, if it is legal, even though it is dangerous for himself? it is a serious form of discrimination and I hope there will be protests...no one should judge others' style of life and decide his future for this.. the merit is what an employer should care about...

Answer 2

I am a business student. So the following reasons is why the hospital wouldn't want to higher a smoker.
1. Some people have allergies to smoke, especially patients, so even if a hospital worker is smoking outside, they still smell like smoke.
2. People that smoke don't generally smell good when dealing with people, when a smoker just had a cigarette and tries talking to a customer, they will most likely not sell.
3. Smoking is unhealthy, and second hand smoke isn't very healthy either.
4. Saves alot of money on the insurance.
5. The government is trying to get everyone to stop smoking, so it is very unlikely that they will do anything about this.

Answer 3

I think it's probably legal, and logical for a couple of reasons.

They are in the business of health care - why hire people who have a habit that violates that basic principle?

They owe their patients an environment where they can recover from injuries and illnesses - why potentially subject them to something harmful?

And probably the biggest reason of all - smoking employees cost them more money than non-smoking employees, in terms of lost time due to sickness, time away from work on a smoke break, etc. Why not do something about it?

I've never smoked, so I don't see the attraction of it. I did grow up in a house where both parents were heavy smokers. Everything stunk all the time, and I hated riding in the car when both mom and dad lit up. I could barely breathe, and I had to open a window even in the winter. I say good for this hospital, and I hope that the idea takes off!

Answer 4

People who are over-weight are actually protected under the ADA, (Americans with Disabilities Act). Employers cannot discriminate according to age, gender, sexual orientation, disability and other specific categories, including obesity.

As a smoker, this would be a great motivation to help me quit smoking. Employers deny employment to people who are active drug user and tobacco is a form of a drug. It is frustrating going to a hospital and seeing nurses and doctors who smoke, and they urge me to quit. Many smokers also take much longer breaks or more frequent breaks.

Yes, it is free choice to smoke. The way things are going, who knows where we will be 5 years from now. Here in New Hampshire, it is now illegal to smoke at any restaurant or bar. I think it should be up to the manager to have a smoke free environment or not. However, in a health facility, I don't want to go into the emergency room and there are nurses smoking outside the ER doors!

Note to "Open Thoughts":
People with obesity are protected by the ADA...If a person is ABLE to do the duties in the position, the ADA provides equal opportunity to employment. If a person is not able to preform the duties, then they won't be taken into consideration for that job, with a disability or not. If you doubt my expertise, read the American with Disabilities Act, Title 1, 2 and 3!

Answer 5

Sounds fair.
I work with a lot of smokers who are constantly on "a smoke break" and they don't clock out which why should they get paid to smoke. Myself and other non smokers get to do their work also when on break.
I say it may be a researched topic on cost control and workers not using company time to take breaks several times a day. It may help productivity and the health of a healthcare worker.
The obesity thing? Well, if you can't do your job then you are not a productive employee.
I think this is a grasp at a straw. If you are not doing your job why should you get to keep it? For any "outside" reason.

Answer 6

In a way it's a good policy for a hospital. But on the other hand if you're a heavy smoker what better place to work could you ask for...lol

Answer 7

I think it is smart, and certainly not new. It is not discrimination, it is their choice. As for the obese people, there are also places where they are already not hired.

I would not hire either. Why, because health insurance costs are so high that I can barely afford it for my employees right now. Hire smokers or obese people and your rates soar.

As for someone saying that obese people are covered by the ADA. I have employees who are required to go into attics and crawlspaces...if they will not fit...I cannot hire them. There are jobs that certain people cannot do.

Call me what you will, but if I hired a smoker or someone who is obese, I would have to fire at least one person due to insurance rates going up across the board. (They base rates on the highest risk)

one last thought...the govt does NOT want everyone to stop smoking...that is a HUGE cash cow for them. They want to APPEAR to want people to stop, but they do not.

Answer 8

I think it is great. With all the laws cropping up saying that empoyers must provide health insurance, it was inevitable that empoyees would begin to insist that their employees be healthy. The rates will cut in half for the company if they have all non-smokers.
not to mention, that smokers take far more breaks and are proven to be less productive.

Regarding discrimination, of course it is, but so isn;t giving people drug tests, enforcing dress codes, and asking people to come in to work during the day when they are goth!!

Answer 9

It is a slippery slope that could lead to all sorts of other exclusions.

I really don't believe that an employer should have any say in what I do on my off time. If they do not want you smoking on their premises, fine. If I can make it to an area where I can smoke on a break that is long enough to leave the premises, who are they to say.

Anyway, isn't addiction considered a disease and you cannot discriminate based on medical impairment, unless it hinders your ability to perform the job correctly?

Answer 10

What message do smokers send in a healthcare agency?

As a healthcare worker, smokers take more breaks, are less effective, and more distracted than other workers.

Answer 11

[What do you think of this?]

i think it's great, potentially expensive for them, but what do i care?

[Is it a form of discrimination? ]

it absolutely is. telling unlike things apart is discrimination.

[If this gains popularity, what will follow?]

anti-tobacco policies in other areas of work? fewer people smoking?

[People who are obese will be denied employment?]

there's no genetic link to smoking. obesity is a condition that is further out of the person's control than smoking.