Clusterheadaches.com Message Board


    
      
        Clusterheadaches.com Message Board
        (http://www.clusterheadaches.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi)
      

        New Message Board Archives >> 2006 General Board Posts >> What say you?
        
(Message started by: Jonny on Nov 30^th, 2006, 7:27pm)

Title: What say you?
Post by Jonny on Nov 30^th, 2006, 7:27pm

"In more general terms, this case challenges the right of an employer to control employees' personal lives and activities by prohibiting legal private conduct the employer finds to be dangerous, distasteful or disagreeable," the lawsuit said.

http://www.azcentral.com/offbeat/articles/1130fired-smoker30-ON.html

Please put your personal feelings about smoking aside and tell me what you think of this.

Whats next?......controling how people eat at home so they dont become fat and a drain on the companies medical insurance costs?

WTF?

Title: Re: What say you?
Post by Shedz on Nov 30^th, 2006, 7:35pm

F*****G disgracefull. Surely a gross invasion of an individuals right to privacy???????????

Title: Re: What say you?
Post by BarbaraD on Nov 30^th, 2006, 7:38pm

I don't agree with it (the company that is). What you do in your home or your own time is up to you. Drugs I can see, but alcohol and nicotine are "personal".

The city of Gladewater wanted to pass an ordinance that there would be no smoking in any business in town. That's when I told them that when their name went on my deed, they could do as they damn well pleased, but as long as my name was on the deed - it was PRIVATE PROPERTY and they could go to hell. That was the end of that little uproar.

But as an employer I would have NEVER thought to tell my employees that they couldn't do this or that in their off hours. I had rules at work that they had to follow, but after 5 they were on their own.

We've got entirely too much government interference in our lives now -- we don't need employers getting in on the act too.

But on the other hand - a guy got fired in Arlington because he ate a poppyeseed hamburger bun and tested positive for that. I think he won his suit.

Oh well......

Hugs BD

Title: Re: What say you?
Post by Sean_C on Nov 30^th, 2006, 7:41pm

I hope this employee wins huge. JMHO

Sean..............................................

Title: Re: What say you?
Post by JeffB on Nov 30^th, 2006, 7:49pm

It's sad, but the trend seems to be growing in popularity with business. I for one would laugh in the face of a prospective employer if that stipulation was put before me. I hope he wins the suit and I'm wondering where the fuck is the ACLU on this one.
And, I don't think I'll be purchasing any Scott products again.

Title: Re: What say you?
Post by Jonny on Nov 30^th, 2006, 7:54pm

Isnt it great that you can work for Scott mixing cancer (long term) causing material, BUT you Cant have a smoke at home?

Title: Re: What say you?
Post by brewcrew on Nov 30^th, 2006, 8:03pm

If they're going to do this, they'd better make tobacco illegal. They won't because the government is totally addicted to the tax revenue.

Regarding this particular case, if the guy had it in writing that the company was going to help him quit and that he wouldn't be tested for nicotine, then he has a case. But folks, this is between a PRIVATE company and one of its employees. It pains me to say it (being a smoker myself), but a private company should be able to hire and fire people based on whether or not that person is an increased risk to the company. Keep the government out of it and let the business decide.

On a philisophical level, I don't have a problem with smokers paying higher insurance premiums. This is all about a relationship between a private insurance company and one of its clients. Again, keep the gubmint out of it.

(Those who know me know that I am just to the right of Ghengis Khan on the political spectrum)

Title: Re: What say you?
Post by Jonny on Nov 30^th, 2006, 8:24pm

on 11/30/06 at 20:03:35, brewcrew wrote:

this is between a PRIVATE company and one of its employees.

So what happens when this is cool and then the company starts with "Opps, you have too much body fat, your fired??......We are sorry but the likes of you are a drain on our medical insurance.

Title: Re: What say you?
Post by Paul98 on Nov 30^th, 2006, 8:36pm

I think it wrong of the company. If you substitute smoker with say, skydiver, fat, drinker, religous person, wears glasses........what do you think the outcry would be?

You don't hear the outcry for tobacco users because the state nannys have done a good job of demonizing it.

I think if private companys want to dictate what their employees can and cannot do on non-company time it opens some very disturbing doors. What if the company chooses to select the race of it's employees?

I think a company should base hiring on the workers productivity only!

-P.

Title: Re: What say you?
Post by floridian on Nov 30^th, 2006, 8:44pm

Hopefully, the activist judges will Act to protect liberties and crush my cynical view that employees in most states in America have exactly one right: the ability to look for a new job if they don't like things (or if their boss doesn't like them for any reason). Its called employment 'at the will' of the employer, and it is a back-bone of conservative economic/political theory. I'm surprised that a Reaganite like yourself would be opposed to this.

Quote:

To understand why US business climate is different than the rest of the World, look at US employment contracts - this is the only country in the world where "at-will" employment is legal & the norm. The result in the US is that despite the low unemployment here, workers are more fearful of loosing their income than in any other western country because employers make no commitment to compensate you from one day to the next.

http://tinyurl.com/y6kx58

What about the person who got fired two years ago because they drove a car to work that had a Kerry bumper sticker on it? Did Republicans put aside their contempt for the opposing party to champion the political freedoms of the average worker? I think not. They had a good chuckle - that person learned a lesson about how things really work here.

Or the Disney policies on grooming - when they bought the 'Love Boat' they told the captain to shave his beard off or look for new work. He told them to shove it, but nobody really cared if the new management fired ole captain Steubinoff.

That reminds me - I need to rummage through my drawers and find a few extra pieces of flair to wear tommorrow. The policy is 12 pieces, but I want to exceed expectations. ;)

Title: Re: What say you?
Post by Jonny on Nov 30^th, 2006, 8:50pm

I dont care how you juggle this....its just plain wrong against what this country stands for to tell you what you can do in private!....LEGALLLY!!!!!

Title: Re: What say you?
Post by Sean_C on Nov 30^th, 2006, 8:59pm

I think the point he's making Flo is its an "off' the clock deal. If a Superintendant of schools does not want you smoking in the classroom with the kinderkids, then those are the "rules"

However, if the teacher smokes a cigar at his daughters wedding and gets "tested" for nicotine the next day at work and gets fired for it, then thats way wrong. Am I making sense?

Cheers

Sean...................................................

Edit to add: My company health insurance premium will not increase because someone on the ploicy in the family smokes.

Title: Re: What say you?
Post by floridian on Nov 30^th, 2006, 9:00pm

on 11/30/06 at 20:50:37, Jonny wrote:

I dont care how you juggle this....its just plain wrong against what this country stands for to tell you what you can do in private!....LEGALLLY!!!!!

I'm not juggling anything ... I think its wrong, too. Most conservatives do not think its wrong - they see work as an agreement or contract, and either party can walk away or refuse to play if they don't like the conditions that the other party is trying to impose. Only a liberal would assert that individuals have a right to refuse the demands of their employer and keep their job.

Welcome to our side, Jonny!

Sean - I know what your getting at - but corporations have long wanted to (and in this country, have) controlled aspects of the private lives of their workers. Henry Ford had Pinkertons check to make sure that his workers went to church every Sunday, and he fired those that made a habit of not doing so. It sucks, but hey, thats capitalism. Golden Rules. There have been some protections extended to workers against this, but it has mostly dissappeared out of practicality - too costly and generates too much bad publicity. But that type of control is not illegal per se.

Title: Re: What say you?
Post by Sean_C on Nov 30^th, 2006, 9:07pm

Your right Flo, there's cases that were in favor of the employer all over the place, it just sucks that it has to be that way.

Sean...............................

Title: Re: What say you?
Post by Jonny on Nov 30^th, 2006, 9:08pm

on 11/30/06 at 21:00:23, floridian wrote:

Welcome to our side, Jonny!

Im on the side that I come down on, Flo......its an American right ;)

How long has it been since Henry Ford breathed a breath?

Title: Re: What say you?
Post by chewy on Nov 30^th, 2006, 9:14pm

What I think is that whatever they saved on insurance premiums is about to be lost to a legal settlement x10.

Then that will be the last of that employment rule.

Title: Re: What say you?
Post by Sean_C on Nov 30^th, 2006, 9:14pm

on 11/30/06 at 21:08:28, Jonny wrote:

How long has it been since Henry Ford breathed a breath?

LOL thats a tongue twister if I ever saw one ;;D ;;D

Title: Re: What say you?
Post by thebbz on Nov 30^th, 2006, 9:16pm

Those Bastards!
jb
Edit: So I suppose sex by the watercooler is out of the question?....... ;;D

Title: Re: What say you?
Post by Jonny on Nov 30^th, 2006, 9:19pm

on 11/30/06 at 21:16:49, thebbz wrote:

Those Bastards!
jb

JB....We the company here by tell you that you can not smoke on the bridge ;;D

Title: Re: What say you?
Post by floridian on Nov 30^th, 2006, 9:31pm

So what about the 'morals clauses' they put into contracts with celebrities - can't a sports figure or actor get drunk and stupid on their time off with out losing their livelihood?

Title: Re: What say you?
Post by Jonny on Nov 30^th, 2006, 9:34pm

on 11/30/06 at 21:31:08, floridian wrote:

So what about the 'morals clauses' they put into contracts with celebrities - can't a sports figure or actor get drunk and stupid on their time off with out losing their livelihood?

That has nothing to do with what they do in their own home......am I wrong here, Flo?

Need sleep, Night, Flo.....love you!

Title: Re: What say you?
Post by Sean_C on Nov 30^th, 2006, 9:42pm

Does your health insurance premium go up if ?

You drink alcohol ?

Ride without a seatbelt ?

Swim in deep water ?

Work with someone who has aids ?

Your gay ?

You don't walk 2 miles a day ?

You like chocolate ice cream ?

Deciding as an employer who does what and when when the days done is kind of ridiculous unless you've signed an agreement with your employer that you won't smoke while employed at the firm. If this kid did that, then he doesn't have a leg to stand on, he's just wasting tax payers money.

To answer Flo's question, no they can't, they agreed not too

Title: Re: What say you?
Post by Ree on Nov 30^th, 2006, 10:02pm

its just wrong.....

but I still want you all to quit...... ree

Title: Re: What say you?
Post by georgej on Nov 30^th, 2006, 10:30pm

Well, I say I'm not buying any Scott/Miracle-Gro products. That's still MY right. Perhaps others will feel the same way.

There are already a couple of major retailers I won't purchase anything from because of their policies toward their employees.

Starve 'em 'till they squeal like piglets.

Title: Re: What say you?
Post by chewy on Nov 30^th, 2006, 10:40pm

Quote:

signed an agreement with your employer that you won't smoke while employed at the firm

The company says he did. But they cant produce it.

Title: Re: What say you?
Post by Sean_C on Nov 30^th, 2006, 10:53pm

I'm sure Sokolov & Sokolov have it under control ;;D

Title: Re: What say you?
Post by FramCire on Dec 1^st, 2006, 12:42am

The only way I would be OK with this is if smoking hurt his job performance in a measurable way. Otherwise this is crap.

but I still want you all to quit (I read this somewhere)

Title: Re: What say you?
Post by burnt-toast on Dec 1^st, 2006, 7:41am

on 11/30/06 at 19:54:26, Jonny wrote:

Isnt it great that you can work for Scott mixing cancer (long term) causing material, BUT you Cant have a smoke at home?

This statement is all too-true. A company with employees manufacturing and spreading pesticides, herbicides and chemical fertilizers where children and pets also play - just to produce greener thicker grass is worried about the effects of smoking on health insurance costs. Talk about hypocrisy.

Unfortunately it doesn't end here. Companies now have access to databases containing extensive amounts of personal information that are used to monitor employees and screen potential employees.

It's gone beyond employement, drug/alchohol, educational and criminal background checks. Everything recorded that you have and/or will do including financial records, legal challenges against government agencies, driving record, etc. are being used by employers.

Forget personal freedoms, welcome to big brotherville - everyone just get in line "OR ELSE"

Tom

Title: Re: What say you?
Post by Bob P on Dec 1^st, 2006, 8:28am

I think the employer should be able to hire and fire whom he wants. Should be allowed to build the workforce they want without the liberal "civil rights" blankets that the lazy fuckoffs always want to wrap themselves in for protection.

If the employer says I'm not going to employ you if you smoke, then it's your decision whether you are going to take the job and go along with that or move on!

Title: Re: What say you?
Post by LadyElaine1 on Dec 1^st, 2006, 9:41am

Hell you can't even adopt a dog or cat now if you smoke !

Smokers suck to most people.

You can't smoke any where anymore except your home and in your car. That will all be stopped to some day. There is a commuinity about 50 miles from here, you can't smoke outside in your on yard.

Do I think its right for a employer to tell us what we can and can not do at home. NO. But its his right how he runs his company.

Why did the guy take the job if he knew and I am sure he did that smokers were not welcome.
If it said Non Smokers only then that means you don't smoke at all.

The goverment tells companys what they can and can not do. Thats why we can no longer smoke when we go out to eat. The goverment set that rule. A lot of places here feel their rights were taken away as owners.

I don't think the guy will win. I think its just a matter of time before it will be hard to find a job if you smoke. I think before its over with smoking will be against the law all the way around. The only reson we can still drink is because the Goverment is full of drunks !

No in short I don't think its right but yet I think you should run your company the way you want to.

Title: Re: What say you?
Post by Richr8 on Dec 1^st, 2006, 9:50am

I don't care for the policy, but if the info was readily available and he signed up for it, I'm sure all of the facts are not in the article, I don't see how he could win.

I sure wish we would spend our money on more meaningful causes.

Personally I wish they would make smoking a felony with mandatroy jail time so that I would be able to quit. I've tried literally hundreds of times, but as long as there is that much money in it, ain'yt happening.

Title: Re: What say you?
Post by echo on Dec 1^st, 2006, 3:31pm

It's just wrong.

I smoke and I therefore pay a higher premium for my medical insurance. Amounts to about $500.00 a year more. I'm going to stop smoking a work and save myself the $500.00 in 2007. No corporate statements about testing. As long as they don't visit my home or car I'm good.

Title: Re: What say you?
Post by B14CK5H33P on Dec 1^st, 2006, 5:14pm

http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f359/Mack420Danger/Nov06/nonsmokers-1.jpg

[smiley=smokin.gif]

Title: Re: What say you?
Post by Jonny on Dec 1^st, 2006, 5:21pm

on 12/01/06 at 08:28:28, Bob P wrote:

If the employer says I'm not going to employ you if you ride a Harley, then it's your decision whether you are going to take the job and go along with that or move on!

Could that be next because it can be dangerous?.....Hmmmmm!

Title: Re: What say you?
Post by brewcrew on Dec 1^st, 2006, 5:58pm

Taken to its logical conclusion, none of us will be able to work for anyone unless we live in a sterile, plastic bubble. Then nobody will work for anyone because we will all refuse to live that way.

Eventually all entrepeneurs will have to pay 100% of their income to the government so big brother can take care of all of us who refuse to work for the uberdemanding ownership class. And our healthcare costs will be through the roof because of the sedentary nature of our existence.

Title: Re: What say you?
Post by Bob P on Dec 1^st, 2006, 6:58pm

Quote:

Could that be next because it can be dangerous?.....Hmmmmm!

It's "PRIVATE" industry. Privately owned, privately run to make as big a profit as possible. Other than the basic:
minimum wage
OSHA to protect the worker
EPA to protect the environment
Government should stay out of private business.

Face it, non-smokers have healthier lungs, better stamina and are more productive than smokers. Pretty good reasons not even looking at the health premiums.

Title: Re: What say you?
Post by Bill_G. on Dec 1^st, 2006, 7:18pm

[quote author=Paul98 link=board=general;num=1164932844;start=0#8 date=11/30/06 at 20:36:22]I think it wrong of the company. If you substitute smoker with say, skydiver, fat, drinker, religous person, wears glasses........what do you think the outcry would be? ]
Or how about if you substitute a CH who had to take a hit of O2 while on a scheduled break. Quite frankly it sucks. But Ohio, like many other states is a free will employment state. The not a very nice persons can fire you whenever they want for no reason at all. I found that out the hard way when I was working for Ryder.
The only solution that I can see is to say F*** Them and the horse they rode in on. Then go find a good job.

PFDAN to all
Bill

Title: Re: What say you?
Post by Jonny on Dec 1^st, 2006, 7:28pm

on 12/01/06 at 18:58:48, Bob P wrote:

It's "PRIVATE" industry. Privately owned, privately run to make as big a profit as possible.

Ok, just so we are clear......if your company told you that because you ride a Harley you are a risk and you would have to pay an extra $1000 a year for healthcare....would you pay or quit?

BTW, my two partners dont smoke and I put out twice what they do...but hey, thats just me, eh ;)

Title: Re: What say you?
Post by FramCire on Dec 1^st, 2006, 8:18pm

on 12/01/06 at 18:58:48, Bob P wrote:

Face it, non-smokers have healthier lungs, better stamina and are more productive than smokers.

Baloney. Smokers generally have more health problems BUT production and stamina is pure conjecture. You are stating opinion as fact. As I said, if a company can prove smoking hurts the employees job performance, then that is one thing but why test for nicotine? Why not test for job performance and fire people who don't perform.

Simply put, if it is about job performance, then test for job performance. If it is about health concerns, why not have them take a physical. I know smokers who run marathons. Can you?

I hate smoking. Smoking was the primary cause of a close friend losing her father (in an automobile accient where someone else was smoking in another car). However, smokers have rights too. If they perform in their job, who cares if they smoke. Pregnant women have less stamina and can be less productive, should women be forced to have their bedroom videotaped to make sure they aren't at risk to get pregnant?

Sorry man but as much as I hate smoking, I can't understand why smokers can be fired if there is no evidence of reduced job performance.

Title: Re: What say you?
Post by Jonny on Dec 1^st, 2006, 8:45pm

on 12/01/06 at 20:18:28, FramCire wrote:

Simply put, if it is about job performance, then test for job performance.

Yeah, test 80% of these big fat fucking cops you see working detail for $39 an hour and WE are paying for it!

The fat fucks couldnt run a mile if you paid them to.....what fuckin a joke!!!

Title: Re: What say you?
Post by burnt-toast on Dec 2^nd, 2006, 2:49am

on 12/01/06 at 18:58:48, Bob P wrote:

On one hand industry cries "but it's private industry" when it needs government to look the other way. Then private industry cries "but we need subsidies to keep our industry strong and employment up" when private industry wants money to subsidize growth and fuel executive compensation plans. Private industry wants government to maintain a hands-off approach only until it needs tax subsidies, grants, low interest loans, etc. paid for or subsidized by public public funds. Private industry can't have it both ways.

The U.S. govenrment gets .40 cents tax per pack on cigarettes while state taxes range from .07 cents to $2.46 per pack. If we're all forced to quit tomorrow that's a lot of tax dollars that will have to come out of someone else's profits.

Non smokers with healthier lungs - maybe, but unlikely with the hazardous emissions private industry spews into the environment. EPA regualations permit private companies above emission limits to continue polluting by buying emissions credits from other private companys that are below their limits. Which private factory do you live next to? And by the way public funds are used to subsidize clean up the hazardous waste sites that private companies leave behind.

Regarding stamina and performance - I've managed smokers, non-smokers and individuals with health problems that could be counted on to consistently get a job done no matter what it took. On the other hand I've managed smokers, non-smokers and generally healthy individuals who just didn't have it in them to work at higher levels for any reason.

Tom

Title: Re: What say you?
Post by E-Double on Dec 2^nd, 2006, 5:21am

I say that I am going out to have a smoke in my backyard.

It is understandable if a Co. does not want to hire a person who does, however the man worked there for several years and claims to only do it on his own time.
That is the BS part of it.
It is not like they are cracking down on the sheep f&ckers who are doing it on their own time.

They need to stay out of personal life PERIOD.........unless it is something that is illegal and effecting job.

Puff the double dragon

Title: Re: What say you?
Post by brewcrew on Dec 2^nd, 2006, 8:32am

on 12/02/06 at 05:21:05, E-Double wrote:

They need to stay out of personal life PERIOD.........unless it is something that is illegal and effecting job.

Thank you. That's what I said in my first post on this thread. If tobacco is the bane of human existence, then make it illegal.

They won't. They can't. They're more addicted to the tax revenue than I am to nicotine.

Title: Re: What say you?
Post by E-Double on Dec 2^nd, 2006, 8:46am

on 12/02/06 at 08:32:21, brewcrew wrote:

Yup! and the fact is that despite the cost increase for example 1 pack of parliaments in NYC = $7.- people still buy them.
I find the 3 for 2 @ $9 haha.

you are correct sir

Title: Re: What say you?
Post by FramCire on Dec 2^nd, 2006, 11:12am

on 12/02/06 at 05:21:05, E-Double wrote:

It is not like they are cracking down on the sheep f&ckers who are doing it on their own time.

What do you have against these people? How does this effect their job performance?

;;D