Quote:
The new rules essentially treat cigarettes like an illegal narcotic. Applications now explicitly warn of �tobacco-free hiring,� job seekers must submit to urine tests for nicotine and new employees caught smoking face termination.
At first I thought it was just an idea someone had, but this stuff is already implemented in some places? WTF? How can that be legal?
"lol we can fire u for using a legal product cuz we thing it's a health risk to ur insurance hahaha" = wtfffff?
So, are they going to start urine-testing fat people for cheeseburgers too?|||Legalities aside... maybe they don't want employees taking smoke breaks all the time.
I agree that this should come hand-in-hand with incentives for healthy employees, though. (thinking healthy weight, exercising, etc)|||I find this to be a dire prophecy of things to come in the new world order.
And yet...why should employers be forced to consider self-destructive applicants as equals to those who are not?|||Quote:
Legalities aside... maybe they don't want employees taking smoke breaks all the time.
I agree that this should come hand-in-hand with incentives for healthy employees, though. (thinking healthy weight, exercising, etc)
You sound like one of those 80% of Americans who don't smoke and want to stop others who do.
Remember what your kind did to smokers.
1) Ban smoking inside work buildings, restaurants, bars etc.
2) Ban smoking outside work buildings, on campuses, on medical facility grounds.
Now, it is step #3: ban smoking in the privacy of their homes (or take away their jobs).
Because businesses have to spend more money on smokers than on nonsmokers...
What's next?
Ban drinking, ban meat products, ban cake, ban skiing etc.
The are federal and state laws in this country that stop exactly this kind of discrimination - a majority oppressing a minority.|||Quote:
And yet...why should employers be forced to consider self-destructive applicants as equals to those who are not?
Treating people equally is a hallmark of equality. Equality is our ultimate goal, right?
Otherwise, you could fire people for eating McDonalds or other junk food, for going on a skydiving trip, for skiing, for getting an x-ray or for living near power lines, or for driving to work every morning (how many deaths occur on the road every year?).
Firing someone for, or forcing an invasive drug test on someone for enjoying a legal product, "just because they may have to go to the doctor at some point in the future because of their behaviour" is immoral, in my opinion.
That new secretary just got roses for Valentine's day. She might get pregnant someday. She'll have to put that on her insurance, which may cost us money. Quick, fire her.
Seriously: These hospitals need to post Human Resource workers at every nearby McDonalds to catch the fatties getting their McPorkout every day, and fire them too. Why treat these fatties who are participating in destructive behaviour as equals, right?
*grumble*|||Quote:
Treating people equally is a hallmark of equality. Equality is our ultimate goal, right?
I'm not disagreeing with you. Overall, I think this is a bad idea and another step toward Big Brotherhood.
On the other hand, if such a thing is legal, why shouldn't a business take advantage of it to ensure healthier workers and therefore more profit in the end?|||Quote:
On the other hand, if such a thing is legal, why shouldn't a business take advantage of it to ensure healthier workers and therefore more profit in the end?
I wasn't trying to yell at you, btw, MV.
But what you say here can also apply to any number of other morally questionable or currently-illegal practices. If slavery was legal, I would expect a business to take advantage of slavery in order to make a profit. So it goes with child labor, indentured servitude and other such practices.
My take is that such a thing shouldn't be legal in the first place. It unfairly discriminates against law-abiding citizens who aren't doing anything wrong.|||Quote:
My take is that such a thing shouldn't be legal in the first place.
Such what thing shouldn't be legal? Smoking itself, or the testing for nicotine type stuff?|||While I think this is absolutely in the wrong order, I'm very glad to see a shift toward the banning of cigarettes. I don't mean to start a flame war or piss off any smokers, but it's just plain bad for you. Aside from the health risks to yourself and others (ie. second-hand smoke), cigarettes create SO MUCH WASTE and litter. There are soooo many reasons to ban cigarettes and no REAL reasons to keep them legal.
/conspiracy on
The only reason they're still legal is because of lobbying.|||Quote:
There are soooo many reasons to ban cigarettes and no REAL reasons to keep them legal.
/conspiracy on
The only reason they're still legal is because of lobbying.
The same could be said for alcohol and all manner of unhealthy foods that are legal.
No comments:
Post a Comment