If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Sun Sentinel)   The city of Delray, Florida will no longer hire people who regularly use tobacco products in order to keep health insurance premiums low   (sun-sentinel.com) divider line 331
    More: Hero, tobacco products, premiums, health insurance premiums  
•       •       •

4489 clicks; posted to Main » on 02 Oct 2012 at 9:57 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



331 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-10-02 01:20:55 PM  
I know this is Florida but have you heard of something called The Constitution?
 
2012-10-02 01:25:52 PM  
Can't they just pass on the extra costs to smokers?  I'm a smoker, and I wouldn't mind.  Its fair.
 
2012-10-02 01:28:39 PM  

Mishno: stonelotus: hiring stupid people still okay.

They're actually selecting for a higher proportion of non-stupid people by refusing to hire smokers. This is a true statement, statistically, the lower a person's intelligence is, the more likely it is they are a smoker.


www.ecigarettedirect.co.uk
 
2012-10-02 01:29:07 PM  

Mishno: stonelotus: hiring stupid people still okay.

They're actually selecting for a higher proportion of non-stupid people by refusing to hire smokers. This is a true statement, statistically, the lower a person's intelligence is, the more likely it is they are a smoker.


source, please.
 
2012-10-02 01:30:09 PM  
Fark all insurance, all types, forever. Fark all idiots who applaud brave actions like this (because of $$) then whine and complain about every other stupid thing driven by the same industry.

UHC is a great idea but jesus christ, in this nation of twats we would be eating "health goo" served in seaweed required by law because of the same stupid justifications people use for stuff like this.

Good on those of you applauding the removal of private/personal choice for increased profits for the insurance companies! I sure hope you're at least a shareholder because if not you're as pitiful as the person smoking from a tracheotomy hole.
 
2012-10-02 01:30:28 PM  

lowrad: Vegan Meat Popsicle: RickyWilliams'sBong:

Your funny


His funny what?
 
2012-10-02 01:33:01 PM  

thewulf: This is awesome. Glad to see more places doing this.

My last job did this and it was fantastic. Current employer is working to eliminate it from the entire property, which means smokes need to walk to the street. Might not be a motivation to quit for most of you, until you realize that I work in a Canadian suburb. -30 with high humidity winds = sucky.


The college I attend used to have a patio area for smokers but decided to ban smoking on the property now (unless you are in a car). So if you don't have a car you now have to run across a 50 mph road with no aid from a crosswalk or stop lights/signs. I'm still waiting for someone to get hit.
 
2012-10-02 01:33:46 PM  

downstairs: Can't they just pass on the extra costs to smokers?  I'm a smoker, and I wouldn't mind.  Its fair.


They have, for a couple decades now.
 
2012-10-02 01:40:54 PM  

stonelotus: Mishno: stonelotus: hiring stupid people still okay.

They're actually selecting for a higher proportion of non-stupid people by refusing to hire smokers. This is a true statement, statistically, the lower a person's intelligence is, the more likely it is they are a smoker.

source, please.


Link
 
2012-10-02 01:52:30 PM  

Science_Guy_3.14159: I know this is Florida but have you heard of something called The Constitution?


Would you care to quote the part of the Constitution that protects smokers?
 
2012-10-02 01:53:02 PM  

Mishno: stonelotus: Mishno: stonelotus: hiring stupid people still okay.

They're actually selecting for a higher proportion of non-stupid people by refusing to hire smokers. This is a true statement, statistically, the lower a person's intelligence is, the more likely it is they are a smoker.

source, please.

Link


www.seanbonner.com
 
2012-10-02 01:55:23 PM  
This is why I won't vote.
 
2012-10-02 01:57:03 PM  

Mock26: Science_Guy_3.14159: I know this is Florida but have you heard of something called The Constitution?

Would you care to quote the part of the Constitution that protects smokers?


The part that doesn't say "we can oppress smokers". You need to learn what the Constitution is actually saying. It's not a list of your rights. It's much much greater than that.
 
2012-10-02 01:58:40 PM  

IRQ12: Good on those of you applauding the removal of private/personal choice for increased profits for the insurance companies!


Nothing has been removed. You can go work elsewhere or self employ and buy your own insurance if you choose to be a smoker.
 
2012-10-02 02:04:17 PM  

HotWingConspiracy: IRQ12: Good on those of you applauding the removal of private/personal choice for increased profits for the insurance companies!

Nothing has been removed. You can go work elsewhere or self employ and buy your own insurance if you choose to be a smoker.



You sound trollish.
 
2012-10-02 02:07:03 PM  

HotWingConspiracy: IRQ12: Good on those of you applauding the removal of private/personal choice for increased profits for the insurance companies!

Nothing has been removed. You can go work elsewhere or self employ and buy your own insurance if you choose to be a smoker.


whoa. At first I misread that as "want birth control for contraceptive purposes" and was wondering what the world had come to. Now I see that you said "choose to be a smoker".
 
2012-10-02 02:07:30 PM  
It has been almost a year since I had a cigarette. My company banned smoking on its campus and created a discount program for non-smokers health insurance premiums. It was the nudge I needed.

And for all of you strawmanning about obesity, my employer addressed this with a number of health insurance discounts available for participating in various health and wellness programs/activities. I'm trapped by my employer and health insurance provider in a sinister plot to make me healthier - the horror!

You have just as much of a right to smoke as you have the right to hit yourself in the head with a claw hammer. Both of these activities may also impact your hirability.
 
2012-10-02 02:08:26 PM  

Amos Quito: HotWingConspiracy: IRQ12: Good on those of you applauding the removal of private/personal choice for increased profits for the insurance companies!

Nothing has been removed. You can go work elsewhere or self employ and buy your own insurance if you choose to be a smoker.


You sound trollish.


Amos Quito: HotWingConspiracy: IRQ12: Good on those of you applauding the removal of private/personal choice for increased profits for the insurance companies!

Nothing has been removed. You can go work elsewhere or self employ and buy your own insurance if you choose to be a smoker.


You sound trollish.


" the removal of private/personal choice " is a bit hyperbolic, seeing as how you're completely free to choose to smoke.
 
2012-10-02 02:08:30 PM  
Vegan Meat Popsicle Smartest
Funniest
2012-10-02 10:31:49 AM


doubled99: The "troll" is just as legitimate an argument.

Actually you racist prick, what you mean is that they shouldn't hire black people since black men account for a hugely disproportionate number of new AIDS cases.

You're a racist.


Whaaaa! The dumb guy called me names!

You stated it. It's just statistics.
Sucks when logic gives you something you find socially unacceptable, huh?
 
2012-10-02 02:12:57 PM  

skullkrusher: HotWingConspiracy: IRQ12: Good on those of you applauding the removal of private/personal choice for increased profits for the insurance companies!

Nothing has been removed. You can go work elsewhere or self employ and buy your own insurance if you choose to be a smoker.

whoa. At first I misread that as "want birth control for contraceptive purposes" and was wondering what the world had come to. Now I see that you said "choose to be a smoker".


Oh look, someone wants to pretend that birth control is only for contraception. Been to that thread, it sucked.
 
2012-10-02 02:13:43 PM  

Mishno: stonelotus: hiring stupid people still okay.

They're actually selecting for a higher proportion of non-stupid people by refusing to hire smokers. This is a true statement, statistically, the lower a person's intelligence is, the more likely it is they are a smoker.


I don't know about that, Obama smoked and look where he wound up.
 
2012-10-02 02:14:01 PM  

HotWingConspiracy: Amos Quito: HotWingConspiracy: IRQ12: Good on those of you applauding the removal of private/personal choice for increased profits for the insurance companies!

Nothing has been removed. You can go work elsewhere or self employ and buy your own insurance if you choose to be a smoker.


You sound trollish.

Amos Quito: HotWingConspiracy: IRQ12: Good on those of you applauding the removal of private/personal choice for increased profits for the insurance companies!

Nothing has been removed. You can go work elsewhere or self employ and buy your own insurance if you choose to be a smoker.


You sound trollish.

" the removal of private/personal choice " is a bit hyperbolic, seeing as how you're completely free to choose to smoke.



Okay, but if Delray *really* wanted to cut risks and reduce costs, they'd move the city out of Florida.
 
2012-10-02 02:15:25 PM  

HotWingConspiracy: skullkrusher: HotWingConspiracy: IRQ12: Good on those of you applauding the removal of private/personal choice for increased profits for the insurance companies!

Nothing has been removed. You can go work elsewhere or self employ and buy your own insurance if you choose to be a smoker.

whoa. At first I misread that as "want birth control for contraceptive purposes" and was wondering what the world had come to. Now I see that you said "choose to be a smoker".

Oh look, someone wants to pretend that birth control is only for contraception. Been to that thread, it sucked.


oh look, someone who can't read. Been to that thread. Every farking day.
 
2012-10-02 02:15:59 PM  

Amos Quito: HotWingConspiracy: Amos Quito: HotWingConspiracy: IRQ12: Good on those of you applauding the removal of private/personal choice for increased profits for the insurance companies!

Nothing has been removed. You can go work elsewhere or self employ and buy your own insurance if you choose to be a smoker.


You sound trollish.

Amos Quito: HotWingConspiracy: IRQ12: Good on those of you applauding the removal of private/personal choice for increased profits for the insurance companies!

Nothing has been removed. You can go work elsewhere or self employ and buy your own insurance if you choose to be a smoker.


You sound trollish.

" the removal of private/personal choice " is a bit hyperbolic, seeing as how you're completely free to choose to smoke.


Okay, but if Delray *really* wanted to cut risks and reduce costs, they'd move the city out of Florida.


1.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-10-02 02:16:10 PM  

cig-mkr: Mishno: stonelotus: hiring stupid people still okay.

They're actually selecting for a higher proportion of non-stupid people by refusing to hire smokers. This is a true statement, statistically, the lower a person's intelligence is, the more likely it is they are a smoker.

I don't know about that, Obama smoked and look where he wound up.



I hope he doesn't dream of being mayor of Delray some day.
 
2012-10-02 02:18:19 PM  

Uranus Is Huge!: ...
You have just as much of a right to smoke as you have the right to hit yourself in the head with a claw hammer. Both of these activities may also impact your hirability.


Unless your job is being a patient of your employer, neither should.

I swear you people watch Demolition Man and think, "wow, what a good idea."
 
2012-10-02 02:21:08 PM  
From Psychology Today: 4 Ripple Effects of Second Hand Fat

"While those who adhere to the SHF mindset would argue their case and cause is easily analogous to second hand smoke, we simply cannot allow our obese population to suffer a similar trauma, being marginalized when we all most need to be engaged in improving upon the overall situation."

Sounds like the researchers are fat.
 
2012-10-02 02:21:54 PM  

HotWingConspiracy: Amos Quito: HotWingConspiracy: Amos Quito: HotWingConspiracy: IRQ12: Good on those of you applauding the removal of private/personal choice for increased profits for the insurance companies!

Nothing has been removed. You can go work elsewhere or self employ and buy your own insurance if you choose to be a smoker.


You sound trollish.

Amos Quito: HotWingConspiracy: IRQ12: Good on those of you applauding the removal of private/personal choice for increased profits for the insurance companies!

Nothing has been removed. You can go work elsewhere or self employ and buy your own insurance if you choose to be a smoker.


You sound trollish.

" the removal of private/personal choice " is a bit hyperbolic, seeing as how you're completely free to choose to smoke.


Okay, but if Delray *really* wanted to cut risks and reduce costs, they'd move the city out of Florida.

[1.bp.blogspot.com image 500x300]



Link
 
2012-10-02 02:24:58 PM  

Mishno: stonelotus: hiring stupid people still okay.

They're actually selecting for a higher proportion of non-stupid people by refusing to hire smokers. This is a true statement, statistically, the lower a person's intelligence is, the more likely it is they are a smoker.


www.mnn.com
 
2012-10-02 02:27:05 PM  
"regularly" = cigar smoking rich white guy loophole intact
 
2012-10-02 02:28:53 PM  
blogs.villagevoice.com

^Read article with interest^
 
2012-10-02 02:29:44 PM  

Dandyhook: "regularly" = cigar smoking rich white guy loophole intact


actually, it likely means those who use tobacco... regularly. Like having a cigar or a cigarette when you're out with the boys 2 months ago won't impact you but smoking cigarettes daily or a few cigars a week will.
 
2012-10-02 02:36:26 PM  
Can any of the freedom loving opponents of this policy explain why employers should be prohibited from discriminating against smokers? Do you believe that tobacco users should be a protected class? Do you believe that the ADA should be interpreted to protect smokers? What is the rational beyond, "I like to smoke?"
 
2012-10-02 02:45:28 PM  

Uranus Is Huge!: Can any of the freedom loving opponents of this policy explain why employers should be prohibited from discriminating against smokers? Do you believe that tobacco users should be a protected class? Do you believe that the ADA should be interpreted to protect smokers? What is the rational beyond, "I like to smoke?"


Personally, I don't like the idea my employer can fire me for choices I make in my personal life. What's next, can he fire me for being a New York Giants fan? Can he fire me for not being a vegetarian? Can he fire me for having a pet snake? I have no problem with them saying no smoking on company property. But to then dictate what I do once I am off that property seems to be overextending. I'd hate to be shopping one day, and my boss happens to be in the store and looks in my cart. "Sugary cereal... soda... mac n cheese... pfft, so unhealthy... you're fired."

If smoking makes me a worse employee, fire me for my bad productivity. Or don't give me a raise when it is employee performance review time and I am not up to par with everyone else. I can see it now, going to my next job, "Why did you leave your last job?" "Oh, I was fired because I went to Arby's for lunch..."
 
2012-10-02 02:46:50 PM  
I can't wait for cities to refuse to hire people who are over weight, drink alcohol, go rock climbing, or any number of other things using the excuse that it reduces health care costs.
 
2012-10-02 02:47:07 PM  

elysive: Dafuq: All you people saying that fat people should be discrimitated against aren't looking at the big picture. No one forces you to smoke, but you still have to eat. Healthy eating is way more expensive than eating processed crap that causes obesity. I didn't eat a lot myself, but was 270 on the scale. I changed my diet and have lost 50 pounds so far. My grocery bill is also up about $70 a week. My sister was was very big herself. She didn't eat a lot, as her family was very poor. What they could afford to eat is what caused the weight gain. No amount of exercise will cause you to loose that much weight if you still eat like crap. Their second daughter is very active in sports, but still chunky.

Smokers know the risks when they start smoking. They can suck it.

WTF sorts of "healthy foods" are you buying at the grocery stores to make this excuse? My weekly grocery bill for my bf and I is lower than my weekly junk food/eating out tab was when I lived alone and was obese. That means I pay less now to feed two people than I used to spend just to feed myself. Some weeks we spend over $20 on fruit alone. Healthy eating requires much more effort than junky/process/convenience eating but it is not truly more expensive.

I suppose a person could live exclusively on ramen noodles or kraft mac n cheese and see their bills go up when they start eating real food, but pasta, rice and beans are fairly healthy staples and they are even cheaper. Most obese people don't get that way eating ramen. There's usually some expensive soda or fast food involved.


i kinda got obese eating ramen. i'm still trying to lose the 10 lbs so i can get back into the "overweight" category
 
2012-10-02 02:49:11 PM  

stonelotus: Mishno: stonelotus: hiring stupid people still okay.

They're actually selecting for a higher proportion of non-stupid people by refusing to hire smokers. This is a true statement, statistically, the lower a person's intelligence is, the more likely it is they are a smoker.

source, please.


First link Google provided:

Link
 
2012-10-02 02:49:32 PM  

Barnstormer: From Psychology Today: 4 Ripple Effects of Second Hand Fat

"While those who adhere to the SHF mindset would argue their case and cause is easily analogous to second hand smoke, we simply cannot allow our obese population to suffer a similar trauma, being marginalized when we all most need to be engaged in improving upon the overall situation."

Sounds like the researchers are fat.


I bet their keyboards are so greasy they had to give up and use Dragon speech-to-text software.

/they had to physically edit out all the "BURP"s, "LIPSMACK"s and "POOT"s
 
2012-10-02 02:52:42 PM  

benagain: So it's ok to deny employment to smokers, but what about fat people? Would as many people agree with denying the obese as they do smoking? I don't smoke anymore, and wish I had never started, but it's the principle of the matter. If a city government can do this, then where will the line be drawn?

435,000 deaths caused by smoking.

400,000 deaths caused by obesity.

If you ban smoking, then you will have to get rid of the snack machine in the break room. All this is going to do is have people lying about smoking to get a job and piss off the people who don't want to lie.

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/6438.php

 
10,000,000,000 deaths caused by religion...
I do agree about the lying issue though. Do they require a medical exam prior to hiring ? I was under the impression the state of FL had ceased hiring anyone with detectable brain activity quite some time ago.
 
2012-10-02 02:56:56 PM  

doubled99: Sucks when logic...


Logic? HA! You have no idea what the fark you're talking about. Pulling random shiat out of your ass and tossing it at the wall in the dire hope that it just happens to stick is desperation, not logic. There are actual numbers behind all of this and if you'd bothered to go dig any up before you went full derp you'd know how stupid you're being.

There are about 1.2 million people in the U.S. living with HIV. There are more than 40 smokers for every 1 of those people.

In the last 30 years, about 600,000 Americans have died as a result of HIV. There are that many deaths due to smoking every 18 months.

Just to bullshiat with some monetary figures, the CDC says that the average cost per smoking employee, to the employer, is $3,300 per year. An HIV patient costs about $25,000 per year ($600,000 for an added 24 years of life).

Smoking, therefore, costs up to five times as much as HIV in health costs and lost productivity alone. Even if we double the figure for HIV to add in lost productivity smoking is still 250% more expensive.

And of course, all this ignores the fact that not everyone who gets HIV did something to bring it on themselves while everybody who smokes choose to cause all their own smoking-related problems.

I await your compelling "logic" explaining how these two things are in any way, shape, or form comparable.  You probably couldn't have picked a stupider analogy to defend. If you'd of been smart, you'd have gone with car crashes, not picked up that other guy's lame AIDS troll. Even with the extraordinarily high costs of treating AIDS patients, here aren't enough people with HIV to make that retarded analogy anything close to sensible.
 
2012-10-02 03:03:11 PM  

Uranus Is Huge!: Can any of the freedom loving opponents of this policy explain why employers should be prohibited from discriminating against smokers? Do you believe that tobacco users should be a protected class? Do you believe that the ADA should be interpreted to protect smokers? What is the rational beyond, "I like to smoke?"


So I am sure you are ok with the whole facebook password thing because who knows? You could be admitting to unhealthy things like riding quads or oversleeping which may cause their premiums to go up.

Employers using personal/private lives as part of employments terms (as they don't apply to the job) is a terrible idea, regardless of the issue.
 
2012-10-02 03:03:31 PM  

OgreMagi: I can't wait for cities to refuse to hire people who are over weight, drink alcohol, go rock climbing, or any number of other things using the excuse that it reduces health care costs.


I have you colored in bright red which means you post insanely stupid things all the time, but hey, while we're having fun...

All that would make sense except rock climbing, which does not significantly increase your risks. Far and away the most dangerous, non-disease related thing you do every day is something everyone else in your risk pool already does as well: driving. The 7th leading cause of death in America and, along with firearms, the only other non-disease cause of death in the top 10 reasons.

Climbing up a rock wall with some ropes attached to you doesn't add much more risk to your pool once you've already factored in that whole "careening down the interstate at 80 mph in the midst of a hundred other two and a half ton steel caskets on wheels" thing.

But facts are hard, so just make up things that sound fact-like, right?

Ironically, weight and alcohol abuse are actually two things that should be prioritized over even smoking given that cardiovascular disease and cancer are the two leading causes of death and diet and alcohol abuse are two major factors in both of those things.
 
2012-10-02 03:08:07 PM  

stonicus: Uranus Is Huge!: Can any of the freedom loving opponents of this policy explain why employers should be prohibited from discriminating against smokers? Do you believe that tobacco users should be a protected class? Do you believe that the ADA should be interpreted to protect smokers? What is the rational beyond, "I like to smoke?"

Personally, I don't like the idea my employer can fire me for choices I make in my personal life. What's next, can he fire me for being a New York Giants fan? Can he fire me for not being a vegetarian? Can he fire me for having a pet snake? I have no problem with them saying no smoking on company property. But to then dictate what I do once I am off that property seems to be overextending. I'd hate to be shopping one day, and my boss happens to be in the store and looks in my cart. "Sugary cereal... soda... mac n cheese... pfft, so unhealthy... you're fired."

If smoking makes me a worse employee, fire me for my bad productivity. Or don't give me a raise when it is employee performance review time and I am not up to par with everyone else. I can see it now, going to my next job, "Why did you leave your last job?" "Oh, I was fired because I went to Arby's for lunch..."


Rather than trying to address your slippery slope, I will just point out that the labor laws in most states allow you to be fired for any or no reason. There are protections for certain folks.
 
2012-10-02 03:08:58 PM  
Is Obama a smoker?
 
2012-10-02 03:15:39 PM  
Watch out fatties, they are coming for you next.
 
2012-10-02 03:21:03 PM  

Uranus Is Huge!: stonicus: Uranus Is Huge!: Can any of the freedom loving opponents of this policy explain why employers should be prohibited from discriminating against smokers? Do you believe that tobacco users should be a protected class? Do you believe that the ADA should be interpreted to protect smokers? What is the rational beyond, "I like to smoke?"

Personally, I don't like the idea my employer can fire me for choices I make in my personal life. What's next, can he fire me for being a New York Giants fan? Can he fire me for not being a vegetarian? Can he fire me for having a pet snake? I have no problem with them saying no smoking on company property. But to then dictate what I do once I am off that property seems to be overextending. I'd hate to be shopping one day, and my boss happens to be in the store and looks in my cart. "Sugary cereal... soda... mac n cheese... pfft, so unhealthy... you're fired."

If smoking makes me a worse employee, fire me for my bad productivity. Or don't give me a raise when it is employee performance review time and I am not up to par with everyone else. I can see it now, going to my next job, "Why did you leave your last job?" "Oh, I was fired because I went to Arby's for lunch..."

Rather than trying to address your slippery slope, I will just point out that the labor laws in most states allow you to be fired for any or no reason. There are protections for certain folks.


Should it be protected? No. Do I disagree with it? Yes.
But I base my "no" on protection from the "it's my choice" angle. So if you're disabled through a deliberate action of your own (bungee jumping accident, skiing, rock climbing, etc..) then you shouldn't be protected either. Born with no leg? Cool. Lost your leg in a water skiing accident? Hop the hell out of my office...
 
2012-10-02 03:24:33 PM  

PallMall: kimmygibblershomework: Meanwhile, nepotism

BAN ALL FAMILY RUN BUSINESSES!!!

FistingMidgets: To all those wanting them to discriminate against stupid - they are. Only a stupid person would smoke knowing all the cost, addiction and health issues.

[vintage-original-ads.com image 287x399]


Hmmm try reading more than 2 words next time, Billy.
 
2012-10-02 03:31:57 PM  
Meh... Go buy an e-cig.
 
2012-10-02 03:37:12 PM  

Uranus Is Huge!: Meh... Go buy an e-cig.


That's still nicotine.
 
2012-10-02 03:40:17 PM  

stonicus: Uranus Is Huge!: Meh... Go buy an e-cig.

That's still nicotine.


Yet not tobacco... and available without nicotine.
 
Displayed 50 of 331 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report