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.

(Mother Nature Network)   It's illegal to not hire somebody because she is an African Muslim lesbian in a wheelchair. But nobody cares if the only reason you don't get a job is because you're a smoker   (mnn.com) divider line 36
    More: Interesting, BusinessNewsDaily, TechMediaNetwork, lesbians, nationalities, tobacco products  
•       •       •

7767 clicks; posted to Main » on 07 Mar 2013 at 6:50 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2013-03-07 01:12:25 AM
8 votes:
That's because you could stop being a smoker.
2013-03-07 02:14:28 AM
5 votes:
If a company wants to regulate smoking on their premises I can understand that.  If they want to make a regulation that employees can not be at the workplace smelling of smoke, I can understand that too.

Restricting employees from engaging in a legal activity outside of the workplace just seems way over the line.

Part of me wonders if this isn't at least in part due to corporations seeing the tide turning towards marijuana legalization and wanting to set precedent now that will allow them to fire/not-hire marijuana users who partake outside of the workplace if it is legalized.
j4x
2013-03-07 07:14:51 AM
3 votes:

Pharmdawg: Smokers in my experience take more breaks than others I manage. They also have more upper respiratory infections and potentially get cancer, raising health insurance rates for everyone. And they stink.


Cool.

When can we start not hiring fat people??
2013-03-07 07:02:29 AM
3 votes:
Smokers in my experience take more breaks than others I manage. They also have more upper respiratory infections and potentially get cancer, raising health insurance rates for everyone. And they stink.
2013-03-07 06:55:57 AM
3 votes:
Your employer shouldn't be able to dictate what you do outside work on your personal time.
2013-03-07 06:54:44 AM
3 votes:
Corporations can and should be allowed to ban smoking on their premises. They can and should be allowed to prohibit or fire people who smell of cigarettes at work.

They should not be allowed to prohibit activities their employees engage in while not at work at all, unless it somehow affects their performance or presence at work. Alcoholics coming in hung over and sweating out their binge from the night prior are just as bad or worse. But regardless of whether your activity was legal (smoking, drinking, gorging on three pounds of bacon) or illegal (8-ball, few bongloads), they have no valid interest in your activities and shouldn't go poking their nose around your private life.
2013-03-07 01:45:45 AM
3 votes:
Smokers are not a protected class.
2013-03-07 09:27:32 AM
2 votes:
In this thread I learned.....

smoking is to liberals what same-gender sexual relations are to conservatives; a convenient excuse to demonize people who don't fit their perception of proper.

You people sound like Westboro Baptists.

Also, letting companies that dump excessive amounts of horrible chemicals where you live and work tell you that your far FAR lesser (nearly nonexistent) effect on other people's health is unacceptable to corporate standards?   Sounds to me like helping position that boot on your own throat juuuust right.

But I guess that's all just the price to be paid for feeling superior to your peers.
2013-03-07 07:17:53 AM
2 votes:

Esroc: I'm a smoker and I support this. Smoking is a disgusting habit and I hate myself every time I light up. I can fully understand the people saying this violates your rights because smoking is legal, and it's really none of the company's business. But I can also say, from experience, that smoking needs to stop. And anything that can be done to do it is worth it.


No. No. NO. That is dangerous logic that leads to Big Brother.I don't care what vice we're talking about or how much someone dislikes it.
2013-03-07 07:03:43 AM
2 votes:

TuteTibiImperes: If a company wants to regulate smoking on their premises I can understand that.  If they want to make a regulation that employees can not be at the workplace smelling of smoke, I can understand that too.

Restricting employees from engaging in a legal activity outside of the workplace just seems way over the line.

Part of me wonders if this isn't at least in part due to corporations seeing the tide turning towards marijuana legalization and wanting to set precedent now that will allow them to fire/not-hire marijuana users who partake outside of the workplace if it is legalized.


Exactly.  It's legal.  What you do (legally) on your own time should not be penalized because of some small-minded douches who think they have the right to control your life.  If you think this does not pertain to you because you do not smoke, just wait.  After they're finished dictating personal rights for smokers, it'll be on for eaters, and then who's next?

Keep letting d*cks strip away your rights and eventually it'll come around to whatever it is you like to do.
2013-03-07 02:55:34 AM
2 votes:
I loved, loved, LOVED smoking.  I recently quit for health reasons, but barring that I'd dearly love to be smoking right now.

Nobody should be forced to put up with it, though.  Smoking is a personal choice.  Being African, female, or lesbian is not.  Being Muslim kind of is, but that involves freedom of speech and religion, which should be encouraged if for no other reason than your personal right to laugh at Muslims if you want to.
2013-03-07 02:55:09 AM
2 votes:

Frederick: TuteTibiImperes: If a company wants to regulate smoking on their premises I can understand that.  If they want to make a regulation that employees can not be at the workplace smelling of smoke, I can understand that too.

Restricting employees from engaging in a legal activity outside of the workplace just seems way over the line.

Part of me wonders if this isn't at least in part due to corporations seeing the tide turning towards marijuana legalization and wanting to set precedent now that will allow them to fire/not-hire marijuana users who partake outside of the workplace if it is legalized.

Thats an interesting perspective.  Mine was more along the lines of insurance costs.


I'm sure that plays into it as well, and that's another slipper slope.  What's next, mandatory cholesterol screenings and workplace mandated dieting  if your readings are too high?  Hair testing to see how often you have a drink at night and mandatory alcohol counseling if it isn't within your employer's (or insurer's) guidelines?
2013-03-07 01:14:25 AM
2 votes:
and because you stink.
2013-03-07 12:52:05 PM
1 votes:

RockofAges: Honestly, where we all these anti-smoking nannies up until big government decided to "denormalize" (ie. actively stigmatize and encourage others to demonize / pile on as well) smoking? Where they smoking themselves during the 50's 60's 70's and 80's, or where they just too timid to make their stand without having the mob opinion / big bro on their side?

To me it's just straight hilarious, because I'm not a pansy and I basically don't complain whatsoever about the lifestyle choices of others (because I expect the same latitude). My response to people who complain about people smoking outside in the snow by the doors? Hold your damn breath for two seconds. If you seriously caterwaul about inhaling about 2 seconds of cigarette smoke indirectly and it's the WORST THING EVAR in your life, you are representative of the soft, unworked, babied contingent of our society and frankly you've not enough perspective on what's really hard in life for me to even value your opinion.

In short, anti-smoking-drones make me lol both due to their mass conformity, oversensitive hysterics, and general plaintiveness. Meanwhile, you'll never hear them loudly cough theatrically as rigs, trucks, and cars pass by them on the sidewalk. I avoid drama queens.


Re read your post. You _are_ a drama queen.
2013-03-07 11:18:03 AM
1 votes:
The problem a lot of people have with smokers is that a huge percentage of them are inconsiderate assholes.

You want to smoke? Fine. You're going to have to earn those 'rights' you think you get though.

1. Stop throwing your butts out the Window, I'm getting tired of the brush fires.

2. Quit lighting up in front of me. If you can get lung cancer, obviously I can s's well.

3. Get out from directly in front of the farking door. The same people who don't want you smoking inside also don't want you creating a nearly impenetrable wall of smoke blocking access to the inside.

4. Quit throwing your farking butts all over the sidewalk, the gutters, porches, the road, etc. Have a little police and pick up after yourself. My buddy can field strip a butt so that it's completely safe to dump in the trash. If you think handling a butt is "icky", then you're actually on the right track.

Not everything ts some kind of attack on you, but you've picked the one vice that people standing near you are immediately and directly affected by. Grow up and accept responsibility for your actions.

The good news is that more smokers actually ARE being courteous, so there's hope yet.
2013-03-07 10:44:22 AM
1 votes:

addy2: Esroc: I'm a smoker and I support this. Smoking is a disgusting habit and I hate myself every time I light up. I can fully understand the people saying this violates your rights because smoking is legal, and it's really none of the company's business. But I can also say, from experience, that smoking needs to stop. And anything that can be done to do it is worth it.

We live in a country that makes it a crime to own one harmless plant that just gets you a little high, but makes it legal to own one that slowly kills you while simultaneously convincing you that it's totally worth it.

/Bah, now I have to go flush my cigs again. 100th times the charm.

Other smokers aren't responsible for your self hatred. Quit already and shut up about it.


www.westseattlefunblog.com
2013-03-07 09:17:56 AM
1 votes:

Cold_Sassy: Nutsac_Jim: Cold_Sassy: Exactly.  It's legal.  What you do (legally) on your own time should not be penalized because of some small-minded douches who think they have the right to control your life.  If you think this does not pertain to you because you do not smoke, just wait.  After they're finished dictating personal rights for smokers, it'll be on for eaters, and then who's next?
They can certain do some quick math and figure out that fatties and smokers will dies sooner, taking more sick days in the process.  This leads to more frequent hires and the expenses required to hire and train someone.
Fatties are easy to identify, smokers not so much.  Same resulting problem though, employees that cost the company more money.  Why should a company not be allowed to discriminate on this.

Well, I respect your opinion but you're missing the point:  It is about your personal iiberties.  Right now it is about smoking, obesity, alcoholism -- but after that has been eradicated, what will be the next 'right' that is selected to be eliminated (or added to) your lifestyle?  Why does somebody else get to dictate how you choose to live your life?  Would you like that to keep happening?  That is my point.
[i403.photobucket.com image 288x288]">


I could agree with you if this was a socialist government that also decided your job as well, but alas you have the right to pick a different occupation.  Personally, if I am dealing with someone from my health insurance, I would rather not smelling smoke or hearing a smoker's voice while they tell me ways I can improve my health for better coverage.  Now if they were trying to implement this rule with a commercial roofing or road crew that works with melted tar, I would laugh so hard.  I would laugh for so long because I don't have smokers' lung.  There has to be a balance of whose rights are going to win, the rights of potential employees or rights of the business owner who needs trained professionals that meet certain criterial.  It is freedom, if you want to live life a certain way, you have the right to find a job that will accept you.  Because if you want a world where no matter what choices you make that you should have the job that you want, then don't whine to me when your waitress feels it unnecessary to wash her hands ever.  She feels that she should have the right not to wash her hands and garnish your plate before bringing it to you.
2013-03-07 08:52:50 AM
1 votes:
It's funny to see all the smokers in here bragging about how quickly they die.  And calling everyone else sheep.  Actually makes me chuckle.
2013-03-07 08:06:19 AM
1 votes:
If I am interviewing 2 people for the same job and both are about equally qualified but one smokes the job goes to the non smoker.

Smokers take more sick days
Smokers take break throughout the day interrupting work
Smokers can really stink up smaller areas like a lab

I don't care if my employee gay marries a dog in a satanic ritual and then smokes crack all weekend as long as they can perform while at work but smokers can be disruptive at work during work hours.
2013-03-07 07:49:42 AM
1 votes:
HindiDiscoMonster:
comes down to....
[image.made-in-china.com image 500x327]


I was sitting here:
"ass"? "Looking over your shoulder"? "Whoever that lady is? Should I know her? She does look kinda familiar.."
OH! Jeans.
2013-03-07 07:39:34 AM
1 votes:
What is next, if you drink soda you can be discriminated against? If you use plastic shopping bags? If you drive a car?

People need to stop being offended so much. We are spiraling out of control.
2013-03-07 07:33:53 AM
1 votes:

radiobiz: So what you are saying is if the job application asks if you smoke, you lie and say no.


They'll smell you at the interview. Cigarette smoke is distinctive.
2013-03-07 07:22:02 AM
1 votes:

dr_blasto: Pharmdawg: Smokers in my experience take more breaks than others I manage. They also have more upper respiratory infections and potentially get cancer, raising health insurance rates for everyone. And they stink.

We have one dude in my department who smokes. He is never sick. There's two fat guys, however, that use up all their sick time in the first three or four months of the year, then start having to use their vacation time. They are also not as productive, spending a good two hours every day sitting around in the break room watching TV and BSing.

It's all anecdotal. There's another guy, a bodybuilder, who is sick all the damn time too.


I smoke and have been with the same company for 13 years. I can count on one hand how many sick days I've taken in all that time. The fatties and people with kids on the other hand, can probably count on one hand the number of full weeks they've worked in their tenure.
2013-03-07 07:21:07 AM
1 votes:

j4x: Pharmdawg: Smokers in my experience take more breaks than others I manage. They also have more upper respiratory infections and potentially get cancer, raising health insurance rates for everyone. And they stink.

Cool.

When can we start not hiring fat people??


if you only hire people with BMI's under 30 you'll be missing out on a lot of muscular people in search of work...
2013-03-07 07:16:04 AM
1 votes:

feckingmorons: Smokers are not a protected class.


This is all that needs to be said.
2013-03-07 07:14:08 AM
1 votes:
I'm a smoker and I support this. Smoking is a disgusting habit and I hate myself every time I light up. I can fully understand the people saying this violates your rights because smoking is legal, and it's really none of the company's business. But I can also say, from experience, that smoking needs to stop. And anything that can be done to do it is worth it.

We live in a country that makes it a crime to own one harmless plant that just gets you a little high, but makes it legal to own one that slowly kills you while simultaneously convincing you that it's totally worth it.

/Bah, now I have to go flush my cigs again. 100th times the charm.
2013-03-07 07:12:44 AM
1 votes:

Pharmdawg: Smokers in my experience take more breaks than others I manage. They also have more upper respiratory infections and potentially get cancer, raising health insurance rates for everyone. And they stink.


We have one dude in my department who smokes. He is never sick. There's two fat guys, however, that use up all their sick time in the first three or four months of the year, then start having to use their vacation time. They are also not as productive, spending a good two hours every day sitting around in the break room watching TV and BSing.

It's all anecdotal. There's another guy, a bodybuilder, who is sick all the damn time too.
2013-03-07 07:10:30 AM
1 votes:
For every job, depending on who's numbers you use, there are 70 applicants for each available position. HR departments are looking for any reason to screen you out. Personally, as a hiring manager, if all other things were equal and I had two candidates of equal merit, I would also pick the non-smoker.
2013-03-07 07:07:58 AM
1 votes:
I can understand this.  Smokers have a lot more insurance costs to deal with, take a lot more breaks during work that cut into productivity time, and are generally unpleasant to be around to us non-smokers.  They smell (yes, you do, you just can't smell it anymore) and have a tendency toward crankiness and drama should they not get their bi-hourly cigarette break).

That said, I don't  agreewith it.  What you do in your spare time is none of your employer's business, so long as it's not illegal or unsafe while on the job. I mean, I wasn't allowed to be a smoker on or off duty as a police officer and now as a paramedic, But both those jobs lent to physicality that smoking was detrimental to.  I can see them banning smoking during work hours, and maybe making them pay more in insurance (doesn't that already happen?), but banning off-time activity seems a bit odd if it doesn't have an impact on the job.
2013-03-07 07:06:23 AM
1 votes:

DO NOT WANT Poster Girl: kid_icarus: Your employer shouldn't be able to dictate what you do outside work on your personal time.

I agree ...if you can come into work and not stink of smoke, who cares?

What stinks tho, is when my coworkers come back into the building after chaining a few outside in their car. Gah.


I agree as long as you apply the same logic to perfume/cologne/perfumed deodorant/etc.

/you do not have the right to not be offended.
2013-03-07 07:05:22 AM
1 votes:
I'm a smoker, but I understand this. It makes you smell and you need a break every hour so you're not as productive.
2013-03-07 07:02:34 AM
1 votes:

kid_icarus: Your employer shouldn't be able to dictate what you do outside work on your personal time.


I agree ...if you can come into work and not stink of smoke, who cares?

What stinks tho, is when my coworkers come back into the building after chaining a few outside in their car. Gah.
2013-03-07 06:31:56 AM
1 votes:
Put me on the jury and nobody would be convicted of discriminating against anybody for any reason. Freedom of association is a basic right.
2013-03-07 02:52:19 AM
1 votes:

TuteTibiImperes: If a company wants to regulate smoking on their premises I can understand that.  If they want to make a regulation that employees can not be at the workplace smelling of smoke, I can understand that too.

Restricting employees from engaging in a legal activity outside of the workplace just seems way over the line.

Part of me wonders if this isn't at least in part due to corporations seeing the tide turning towards marijuana legalization and wanting to set precedent now that will allow them to fire/not-hire marijuana users who partake outside of the workplace if it is legalized.


Thats an interesting perspective.  Mine was more along the lines of insurance costs.
2013-03-07 01:56:58 AM
1 votes:
obviously one attribute is a matter of choice.
somebody cares...
somebody
2013-03-07 01:23:23 AM
1 votes:
False equivalence is false.
 
Displayed 36 of 36 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report