The only time I've had a problem with co-workers who smoked was a job I had last year. I had a co-worker who was outside smoking every chance he got, which was about twice an hour. It was a customer service position and he worked the phones, so I will admit that the position was a bit stressful, and I didn't work the phones, so his job was more stressful than mine, but he was the only one who took any opportunity to smoke when ever he could, everyone else who smoked cut there's to about three times per day.

I have noticed that the more stressful the job, the more smokers the company has. My last job, about 3 or 5 people total smoked, and we had over 40 employees. Customer service jobs tend to have at least 2/3s smoking, or more.

While I don't smoke, I am all for the rights of smokers (and anti-smoking nazis need to STFU), but everyone knows that lying on an application will only get you fired, it says so right there on the application.

What surprised me was I got fired about 2 weeks ago for LOOKING for a new job. Work performance was good, no problems with the boss or with any of my co-workers, just that my supervisor found out that I was looking for a new job and fired me.

generaltimmy: This is about insurance fraud ($500 deduction). Who thought these blue colalr types would be involved in a white colalr crime?

One is a typo, two means you're an idiot.

durbnpoisn: Reminds me of that clip of Snoop Dogg where a reporter is saying to him, "I thought you quit smoking pot." And he's sitting there smoking a joint, going, "yeah. I did. Why?"
"But you're smoking a joint right now."
"No I'm not."


In any event... All those people have to do, (and this will stand up in court), is bring up the exact wording of the question on the form.
"Do you use tobacco?"
"No."

They could be telling the truth, if they quit smoking that morning. And that's all they should have to say.
It wasn't specific enough. It should have said something like, "Have you, used tobacco products in the past 30 days?"

The last insurance papers I signed had a timeframe in the question. I believe it was "within the past 24 months" or something like that.

But, your point is still valid. Maybe they had all quit years ago and recently started smoking again.

Tucci: Smokers can be such assholes sometimes.
And ex-smokers are amongst the most militant against smokers.

MadAsshatter:

Duke_Phillips: Fark is so helpful, I've learned that the most persecuted people on the planet are white male Christians who smoke. Poor guys

It would appear that learning isn't your strong suit.

No, my strong suit is polka dancing. But if you seriously read threads like these and don't see a smattering of unnecessary paranoia and persecution complexes (albeit entertaining ones), then apparently reading isn't your strong suit.

Anti_Product: My employer has a similar policy. While I don't like the higher premium, I don't feel others should have to pay for my addiction.

You pay for the fatties' addiction to food.

That's the point of insurance. You spread the risk around.

Uncle Karl: stellarossa: Non-smoker. Works in insurance. Knows people in the company who smoke and tick 'non-smoker' box every year. Hates that. Means I pay more to subsidize your lying ass.

I think Whirlpool are being very generous providing an area for smokers to smoke and not work. If you smoke and want employer-based health insurance, tell the truth. You tick the 'non-smoker' box for one reason: you won't have to pay the surcharge that you're well aware would otherwise be included in your premium and that you should be paying. Whirlpool aren't forcing you to take their insurance but, if you choose to, they'd like you to tell the truth, please.

/Underwriting Manager

Any idea what the point of insurance is? SPREAD RISK, if you limit the group you sure as hell are spreading less risk.

Any idea what they were first intended to do?

An insurance company should pay out 100%+ of every dime it collects, its method of making money should be investing the float.

I'm well aware what insurance companies were first intended for. Things may have changed in the last few hundred years, though.

Everyone paying the same premium doesn't work, mate. The people who don't make claims (aka good risks) will leave and find a cheaper alternative leaving you with the people who make frequent claims (aka bad risks - smokers maybe?).

Example: you charge double the going rate for a certain type of insurance. Pretty soon the only people you'll have left are the people who cannot find insurance cheaper anywhere. Why can't they? Because they are a 'bad risk'.

Your 'paying out 100%' thing sounds great until most insurance companies go tits up because their investments didn't pan out they way they thought. Teh stock market isn't always up,up,up.

SchlingFo: cryinoutloud: So I can be a cubicle dweller like you guys? No thank you.

Ah, yes.
Anyone who manages to get health insurance and good working conditions is a "cubicle dweller".
If you want to biatch about how unfair it is that you don't have any benefits, then get a new job.
If you can't get a new job, get smarter.
If you don't want a new job, quit your biatching.

I wasn't biatching--I just mentioned it. for all the security and pay of some jobs, it isn't worth it to me. And I guess if we don't all fit into the norm of having a regular job with regular benefits, it's something to make fun of. Just like I can make fun of "cubicle dwellers." That's not my idea of "a good job."

You got a problem with that? Apparently you do. Feeling trapped in your work or something?

Maytag man was heard laughing in the designated smoking area....

Uncle Karl: Spongebob Plaid Pants: Also, I don't smoke, but I hear it takes a year for the nicotine to work its way out of your system. ONE cigarette in the past year qualifies you as a smoker.

You hear wrong, the half-life of nicotine in a human is about 2 hours.

Yeah, I gotta quit believing what I hear. But I do believe the insurance applications ask if you have smoked in the past 6-12 months. And I wasn't talking about half-life, just the level of nicotine or whatever substance they test for to call you a smoker. Anyone know more about this?

I_C_Weener:
Have you ever had premarital sex?
More than 2 partners?
Do you use a prophylactic or go bareback?
Are you a screamer or do you just sit there?
BACK OFF MAN, I'm an insurance agent.

"Screamers" are at an increased risk of vocal cord polyps. That would not be covered due to a pre-existing risk factor.

simply for the sake of repetition:

THE PEOPLE ARE NOT BEING FIRED FOR SMOKING.
THEY ARE BEING FIRED FOR STEALING $500/YEAR FROM THEIR EMPLOYER BY LYING ON THEIR INSURANCE FORMS.

And no, if they opt for their own insurance the company doesn't care if you smoke at all. Your a idiot, sir.

For those who are to stupid to realize that this is not about smoking I have swapped a few word that make no change to the over all story,


Whirlpool suspends 39 workers, says they lied about Drinking diet Coke
By TOM MURPHY
AP Business Writer
INDIANAPOLIS (AP) -- Drinking diet Coke can be hazardous to your health, and it's turning into a bad career move, too.
A Whirlpool Corp. factory in Evansville, Ind., has suspended 39 workers who signed insurance paperwork claiming they don't use Coke cola and then were seen Drinking diet Coke or chewing Coke cola on company property. Now, some could be fired for lying, company spokeswoman Debby Castrale said.
As annual health care premiums rise more than 10 percent a year, many companies are trying to rein in costs by encouraging healthy living.
"I can't think of a client of ours who has not shifted their focus to controlling the cost of their health care plan," said Indianapolis benefits lawyer Mike Paton.
Some employers have developed wellness programs to motivate employees, while others ask employees to state on benefits forms whether they use Coke cola.
Whirlpool, based in Benton Harbor, Mich., uses financial incentives to encourage U.S. workers and their dependents to abstain from Coke cola use, spokeswoman Jill Saletta said. The specifics vary according to location.
In Evansville, the 1,500-employee factory charges Coke cola users an extra $500 in annual health insurance premiums. The refrigerator factory has levied the extra premium since 1996, and it depends on employees to honestly fill out forms. It doesn't mandate blood tests to detect nicotine or trail employees outside work, Castrale said.
Management suspended the 39 employees Friday after they were spotted using either chewing Coke cola on company property or taking a drink in one of the factory's dozen shelters for outdoor Drinking of diet Coke, Castrale said.
"It's definitely not something we wanted to do," she said. "It's unpleasant."
The employees were suspended without pay, and they'll present their case at "fact-finding" meetings before management determines their fate. Whirlpool had to recall some laid-off workers to keep production running due to the suspensions.
A 2007 national survey showed that 16 percent of all large employers - those with 20,000 or more employees - adjust health care premium contributions according to the worker's Drinking diet Coke status, according to the human resources consulting firm Mercer.
The federal Employee Retirement Income Security Act limits the changes an employer can make to a health premium because of a worker's unhealthy habits. But it doesn't set parameters on punishment if an employee lies about his or her habit, Paton said.
Lewis Maltby, president of the National Workrights Institute, which advocates for employee privacy, sees no problem with employers trying to curb Drinking diet Coke. But he worries that the trend of cracking down on employees' unhealthy behavior is extending beyond Coke cola use.
"We shouldn't have to give employers complete control over our private life so they can save a few dollars on medical care," he said.


Sorry if it sounds a little funny but I use the find replace feature in word.

stellarossa: The people who don't make claims (aka good risks) will leave and find a cheaper alternative leaving you with the people who make frequent claims (aka bad risks - smokers maybe?).

You're speaking as if the majority of americans are enrolled in individual health insurance policies.

I don't know anyone with insurance who isn't in a group policy through their employer.

Okay so it's legal. If you smoke knowing what we know today, you are a complete dumbass, over and out...

stellarossa: Your 'paying out 100%' thing sounds great until most insurance companies go tits up because their investments didn't pan out they way they thought. Teh stock market isn't always up,up,up.

ever hear of bonds?

Example: you charge double the going rate for a certain type of insurance. Pretty soon the only people you'll have left are the people who cannot find insurance cheaper anywhere. Why can't they? Because they are a 'bad risk'.

Which is why it should not be a private for profit business, at the very least not publicly traded. It should exist for the common good, not to make a quick buck. In the USA we spend more tax dollars per person on health care than nations like the UK and Germany which actually have universal health care.

Tucci: Smokers can be such assholes sometimes.

Because non-smokers are never happy. We could be required by law to stand in the snow naked to smoke, and some monkey licking SOB non-smoker will biatch about us getting ash on the snow.


/going out to smoke on your lawn.

Quantum Apostrophe:
Any company that has a woman that looks like this selling their products can't be all bad, can it?

With that much contrast, that could be Frances McDormand with a perm.

debug: What if they weren't smokers at the time they filled out the forms and picked up the habit after?

It's statistically unlikely that this is the case. Most smokers start before entering the workforce at all, let alone starting any one job in particular. But if they can prove that their smoking habit is new, they should be reinstated.

It should be the employee's responsibility to make sure that any insurance-related paperwork they have filed is kept accurate and up-to-date, but failing to do so does not merit termination.

If you didn't rtfa and don't read every comment in smoking threads, let me summarize this particular one for you:

Company: Welcome aboard. We offer health insurance but we do not absorb the rate increase for at-risk behavior like smoking. That being said, if you are willing to sign this waiver stating that you do not participate in at-risk behavior you will be eligible for the lowest rate that our provider offers.
Smoker: I'm with you so far.
Company: Obviously, we don't care if you smoke or not. Unfortunately, if you do you'll still be eligible but, again, we will not absorb the higher cost of insurance and you'll have to pay a higher premium.
Smoker: I see.
Company: The third option available to you would be to completely opt out of our insurance package and go with another provider that is in no way affiliated with Whirlpool.
Smoker: Makes perfect sense.
Company: Which plan will you be choosing?
Smoker: The cheapest one. I don't smoke!
Company: Great, now just sign right here and we'll get you on to your orientation. Again, welcome aboard!
Smoker: Do you think I could have a few minutes? I need to go to the... restroom.
....
....
....
Company *looks out the window*: You've got to be farking kidding me!!!
Smoker *comes back from break*: OK, I'm ready to go!
Company: Out to your car...? 'Cause you're farking fired.
Company: THAT'S NOT FAIR!!!
...
...
...
fark thread smoker1: THIS is BULLshiat. They're firing people for SMOKING!!! WHAT'S NEXT!!!?!?!?!?
fark thread smoker2: That's right comrades, bend over like nice little sheep while the corporations take away your rights!!!

rational people:


You're now caught up and can move on to another thread.

Sofajockey: well-tapered, firm and regular bowel movements?
[]Yes [] No


Answering "Yes" to any of these questions would eliminate the perspective employee from being hired.

I would be fired for having healthy turds? Well, yeah, if I did it at my desk, sure. (again)

Spongebob Plaid Pants: Uncle Karl: Spongebob Plaid Pants: Also, I don't smoke, but I hear it takes a year for the nicotine to work its way out of your system. ONE cigarette in the past year qualifies you as a smoker.

You hear wrong, the half-life of nicotine in a human is about 2 hours.

Yeah, I gotta quit believing what I hear. But I do believe the insurance applications ask if you have smoked in the past 6-12 months. And I wasn't talking about half-life, just the level of nicotine or whatever substance they test for to call you a smoker. Anyone know more about this?

72 hours, That is how long you go from smoking to taking a tobacco use urine test and passing. This is about 24hours more than is needed just to be sure, and is the time a heavy smoker needs to wait.

15 seconds is how long it would be before I told my employer to go fark himself if he wanted me to take a urine test.

/not a drug user, but a fan of privacy and educated enough to get another job easily

MDGeist: Yea another "I hate Smokers" Fark thread!

It's amusing to see the same people that post pictures of little under age girls in their underwear try to come down on others for their bad habits.

you say that as if underage girls in their underwear are a bad habit.

/I don't smoke, but I support a smoker's right to use a legal product.
//As long as its not while I'm eating.
///I'll take a smoker in the next booth over children any day of the week.

phartnocker: If you didn't rtfa and don't read every comment in smoking threads, let me summarize this particular one for you:

enjoy.

phartnocker:

You're now caught up and can move on to another thread.

Thank you, that saved a lot of reading dumbass smoker posts. Well done.

I work for a health insurance company so I'm getting a kick out of these replies!

But no, we had the same policy installed for this year's coverage and I wrote to my bosses that if smokers are being charged more for their health risk, isn't it only fair that employees with a BMI of 30 or higher should also pay a surcharge? Never got a response.

/obese people are the majority at health insurance companies
//scary

phartnocker: You're now caught up and can move on to another thread.


100% accurate. Nice job...

xresx: I just came here to say my Whirlpool Dryer has broken no less than 3 times since we got it 6 months ago.

Was it smoking?

Sofa King Smart: bigbottom
Ever read 1984? Big Brother IS watching you! Your personal Liberty is goin' down the tubes. I suggest everybody just quit smoking, then the Government will have to look elsewhere to get all of that tax money, perhaps the money could come equally from all of us instead of just from us smokers, seems more fair to me.

why yes, I have read 1984... great book.

But about that government that takes in taxes and those hospitals that take care of all the smokers with their health problems... cancer and such... seems like i've been paying higher premiums to cover those smoker only ailments for a lot of smokers for many years... seems like the extra premiums for smokers is the part that makes it 'more fair'!

as soon as you start taxing the millions of lardasses with bags of cheetos permanently glued to their mouths, then it's 'more fair'. until then, its just douchebaggery

Delashwood:

I love when people make it seem like if you even do any sort of criticizing or complaining, it automatically means you're trying to say you're the most persecuted person on the planet.

You know, you don't need to locked in a gas chamber, suffering from testicular cancer, watching - as you slowly die - your family get raped to actually complain. People DO actually have the right to question and complain about little stuff even if their home mailing address isn't Genocide Way, Darfur.

In other words, no one is accusing you of wrongly naming yourself Biggest Victim In The World just 'cos you're complaining about Fark comments.

/I'm just accusing you of being an asshole.

Eh, maybe. But at least I know the definition of "exaggeration", it might be helpful for you to look it up.

WaltzingMathilda: mattknows: Sybarite: Those insurance forms can be pretty confusing. Maybe they all accidentally checked the NO box and thought they were checking the NONE OF YOUR GODDAMN BUSINESS box.

THIS

Again....underwriting. You want to increase your health risk? You insurance costs more.

Do you have a problem with speeding tickets increasing your car inurance? If so, you're an idiot.

Hope they're firing all the fatasses too...

FarkinMad:
For those who are to too stupid to realize that this is not about smoking, I have swapped a few words that make no change to the over all story,:

Word of advice: If you are going to start your post by calling a group of people stupid, you may want to check for glaring typos.

drunken_snowbunny: But no, we had the same policy installed for this year's coverage and I wrote to my bosses that if smokers are being charged more for their health risk, isn't it only fair that employees with a BMI of 30 or higher should also pay a surcharge? Never got a response.

Unless you had also included all sorts of exceptions for bodybuilders, tall people, and people with genetic thyroid disorders, that's probably why you never got a response.

stiletto_the_wise: Welcome to The Corporation.

You will eat what we tell you to eat.
You will drink what we tell you to drink.
You will exercise when we tell you to exercise.
Your body weight will remain within a certain range.
You will not participate in hobbies we determine to be risky.



// Walt? Is that you?

dittybopper: The problem is that we aren't talking about over an entire lifespan, we are talking about during the period when you are working.

Smokers do tend to die earlier, just a few months after they retire when they aren't the responsibility of the company's health care plan anyway (usually). They do however get sick more often in their 50's and 60's than nonsmokers, thus creating a greater burden on those who provide insurance for that company.

So yes, from an over-all public policy standpoint smokers cost less because they tend to die earlier, from the more narrow view of employer provided health care plans, they do cost more.

Actually they are also more likely to be working-poor and not go to the doctor as often as others.
But yes a middle class or better smoker will go to the doctor more in his 50s.

Uncle Karl: stellarossa: Your 'paying out 100%' thing sounds great until most insurance companies go tits up because their investments didn't pan out they way they thought. Teh stock market isn't always up,up,up.

ever hear of bonds?

Example: you charge double the going rate for a certain type of insurance. Pretty soon the only people you'll have left are the people who cannot find insurance cheaper anywhere. Why can't they? Because they are a 'bad risk'.

Which is why it should not be a private for profit business, at the very least not publicly traded. It should exist for the common good, not to make a quick buck. In the USA we spend more tax dollars per person on health care than nations like the UK and Germany which actually have universal health care.


Hi Karl!

I've heard of bonds, yes.

Ah yes Universal Health Care. I lived with Universal Health Care for more than 30 years. It was great. You can get an appointment to see your doctor in less than 3 weeks. Only 18 months to wait before getting your hip replaced. Only paying 90-100% of the cost for dental work. I sure miss it.

/approves

stellarossa: Hi Karl!

I've heard of bonds, yes.

Ah yes Universal Health Care. I lived with Universal Health Care for more than 30 years. It was great. You can get an appointment to see your doctor in less than 3 weeks. Only 18 months to wait before getting your hip replaced. Only paying 90-100% of the cost for dental work. I sure miss it.

I lived with it for many years as well, and you are a liar or come from some backwater hellhole, or the UK. Right now with good old expensive covers everything insurance it takes 4 weeks minimum to see my endocrinologist and 2 weeks to see the regular doc.

/Germany, worked great

cryinoutloud I have a cousin who's killing himself with alcoholism. but he's managed to hold onto his good job with [very large phone company]. In the last two years, he's been in the hospital 9 times, mostly for alcohol-related stuff. Then he farked up his back--four trips to the hospital, three operations. He now hasn't worked since last October, and it looks like he won't be returning any time soon, since his back is still screwed up, and he's been in the hospital for pancreatitis (from drinking) three times in the last three months for that.

You know why he still has a job? He's in a union. When I saw him, he was going to the dentist to have a front tooth implanted (that he'd knocked out in some drunken fall) and then went to get some new prescription glasses. All paid for.

I'm a good hard worker and I don't have health insurance. Good thing I don't get sick, and haven't hurt myself, or I'd be living in my car. Some people don't know how easy they have it.

The truly sad thing is that your cousin could probably get dried out at no cost to him. Many insurance companies will pay 100% for rehab because it is far less expensive to pay for addiction rehabiliation services than it is to pay for all the accidents, health problems, etc. over the lifetime of an addict.

But just like anything else--the addict has to want to get better.

question_dj: So this raises the question of whether or not the employee would be allowed to smoke if they buy their own insurance policy and don't rely on the company to provide it. I would think that if the employee is footing the entire bill for their insurance coverage, these kinds of policies shouldn't apply.

So when are they going to start firing people for being fat and start paying for my gym membership(s)?

The company is not telling them they can't smoke as a condition of employment, they are telling them to honor their commitment not to smoke that they signed up for in exchange for lower health insurance rates. Two different things. If you smoke but stated you didn't in order to get a lower insurance rate, that's fraudulent.

MyFarkIsWorseThanMyBite: Sybarite: Those insurance forms can be pretty confusing. Maybe they all accidentally checked the NO box and thought they were checking the NONE OF YOUR GODDAMN BUSINESS box.

When you ask an insurance company to carry the costs of your addictions and bad health, it's their business then, you want to keep it a private thing? Pay your own health care costs out of pocket. You want someone else to pay when you get lung cancer? You gotta let them know you're an addict.

Period

Call me crazy but I thought the entire point of insurance was to spread the cost of health care across a large group of people to normalize the statistical aberrations. Some people will smoke and eat McD's every day of their life, live to be 90, and require very little medial care. Others will exercise every day, eat a balanced diet with all of the recommended vitamins and minerals, and have 3 types of cancer by the time they're 30. Will you give a rebate to the estate of the 90 year old smoker for all this extra money that was collected over the years but never used? Will you put a lien on the estate of the 30 year old because they didn't pay their "fair share"?

But it's okay because they're dirty smokers. What about alcohol? That's responsible for a lot of health care expenses. What about someone who's fat and has high blood pressure? Should they pay more? Should they have to put up with HR monitoring their food intake? "You're fired because you put regular ranch dressing on that salad and you agreed to only eat fat-free dressing!"

Good. If you're a drug addict, at least be farking honest about it.

stellarossa:
Ah yes Universal Health Care. I lived with Universal Health Care for more than 30 years. It was great. You can get an appointment to see your doctor in less than 3 weeks. Only 18 months to wait before getting your hip replaced. Only paying 90-100% of the cost for dental work. I sure miss it.

We don't miss you either. PS: my dad enjoys still having a house instead of having to sell it to pay for mom to almost survive cancer.

What if they promise just to smoke the ones that say "Low birth rate"? I mean, if they smoke the ones that say "Lung cancer, heart disease, etc.", they're just asking for it.

RocketCarHead: Maytag man was heard laughing in the designated smoking area....

Whirlpool owns Maytag. Bought it a couple years ago.

SchlingFo: I don't know anyone with insurance who isn't in a group policy through their employer.

I (and my family) am in an individual policy. Policy through work was too crazy expensive, so we got a high-deductible plan with an HSA.

Theaetetus: Unless you had also included all sorts of exceptions for bodybuilders, tall people, and people with genetic thyroid disorders, that's probably why you never got a response.

Why?
Bodybuilders have higher heart attack rates, thyroid disorders predispose people to cancer, heck this stuff all costs the insurance company money.