"Tobacco-Free Hiring?"

[suchende]

I find it odd that posters are alluding to/quoting the Niemöller piece to defend putting government controls on private entities. Maybe just a sign of how entangled the Federal gov't has gotten with big business.

Actually my effort was to make people aware of the manipulations of a big business (insurance co) and to resist those manipulations (or speak out against them) if they are so inclined.

As far as the government entangled with big business, I think we've only seen the tip of that iceberg. The recent Supreme Court ruling allowing corporations to donate limitless money directly to political campaigns will eventually result in a corporation-owned government. But that's for another thread, and may be too political for PS. So don't get me started on that one!

Okay I will admit that I haven't read the full decision but I am pretty sure that's not what Citzens' United says. Corporations, as "people," are still subject to caps, and their PACs are still subject to caps. They can, however, spend limitless caps on their own ad campaigns as an exercise of free speech.

 

[ForteKitty]

There's a big difference between discriminating against someone who is sick (who would ever choose to be sick?), and someone who chooses to smoke. And yes, I believe smoking is a choice. Nobody shoved a cigarette in their mouth in the first place. If they developed an addiction, it's still their responsiblity to seek help if they really want to quit. If they dont, that's their choice.

It's not a fair comparison. I dont know anyone who would choose to be sick.

Addiction IS an illness of the brain.

You might have a drink every once in a while. Consider yourself lucky that the area of the brain that controls addiction didn't light up like wildfire and make you NEED alcohol.

There are many people who choose to be sick, when they aren't in their right mind. Mental illness causes this everyday, millions of times per day. Ever see someone with bipolar disorder or schizophrenia say they're aren't sick and stop taking all of their meds? I have. So, no, addiction isn't the same as heart disease, but it is almost exactly the same as any other mental illness. Unless you are arguing that mental illness isn't real and that it is a choice, then it is to be accepted that addiction is a very real illness of the brain.

Of course addiction is an illness of the brain. I just dont think cigarette addition it's in the same category as mental illness, sorry.

That is trivializing mental illnesses, which are very serious and not nearly as recognized as they should be. By putting cigarette addiction in the same category as mental illnesses, you're giving people excuses as to why they cannot quit, and putting the blame on something beyond their control. They CAN if they want to, but it wont be easy, and they will probably relapse. It's possible. They are still sick, but at the same time, they are fully functional and they can take control if they want to. They can be cured. Mental illness is a lifetime struggle. As far as i know there is no cure. I pray for the day when i'm wrong.

 

[Tacori E-ring]

There is no cure for addiction. It can be arrested, but never cured. It is a *disease* but no one knows for sure what causes it. Yes, there is research that supports a genetic component, but it is not so black and white. Environmental and social components also can feed an addiction. It can mimic mental illness. There are lots of duel diagnosis (meaning many, many addicts ALSO have mental illness) but according to the DSM IV, addiction is separate from a mental illness diagnosis. Both are crummy hands to be dealt. I do not believe (from personal and professional experience) that addiction has anything to do with lack of will power.

Tobacco & alcohol use are socially acceptable b/c they are legal and so embedded into our culture. Cravings for tobacco, after quitting, can last a lifetime. It kills 1,000 people a day in the US. Second-hand smoke kills 50,000 a year in the US. It shortens a man's life a little over 13 years, and a female's a little over 15 years. I doubt anyone would argue that tobacco use is healthy in this day and age. We know better, but the question is can tobacco use be used against a potential employee? I don't know how it can be. Smoke free environment, yes. Drug testing, yes. Testing for tobacco? Slippery slope.

 

[Echidna]

Guess I'm just happy to live in a more liberal country...

Ditto Pandora!

I find these discussions endlessly fascinating because here in Australia, health insurance is not linked to employment. Free health care is available to those who need it (although wait times can be long and it's not a perfect system). Citizens are encouraged to purchase health insurance from registered providers. There is competition in this market but essentially I pay premiums based on my age, behaviour (i.e. non-smoker), and family history. Health insurance is not compulsory but there are tax incentives for high income earners so they don't burden the public health system.

My employer does not know anything about my health! Frankly, it's none of their business as long as I perform my job appropriately. The only reason they would care if I smoked was if I took too many breaks. I don't know anyone that has ever been drug tested prior to being awarded a job, or even while on the job. Seriously, this makes my mind boggle! Interesting issue...

 

[hawaiianorangetree]

I don't know anyone that has ever been drug tested prior to being awarded a job, or even while on the job. Seriously, this makes my mind boggle! Interesting issue...

I find that interesting Echidna! Anyone who works in mining (on site) is drug tested before they are offered a job and will continue to be throughout their employment. My husband is drug tested randomly on a semi regular basis, he will go in to work in the morning and won't be able to get through the security gate without taking an on the spot drug test. They also have random breathalyzer testing as well.

Public transport drivers (bus, train) are also drug and alcohol tested on a regular basis.

My husbands work has also introduced a total smoking ban on site. People have to tag out of the gate and leave the work site in order to have a smoke break, so times off the job are recorded. They have provided counseling and quit programs for people wanting to quit, free of charge. They put the 'healthy workforce, we care about our employees" spin on it but really everyone knows it is about productivity. Less time on smoke breaks means more time working equalling more $$$$ for the mining company. BHP announced a record profit today so who knows, it could be working!

 

[dragonfly411]

I don't know anyone that has ever been drug tested prior to being awarded a job, or even while on the job. Seriously, this makes my mind boggle! Interesting issue...

I find that interesting Echidna! Anyone who works in mining (on site) is drug tested before they are offered a job and will continue to be throughout their employment. My husband is drug tested randomly on a semi regular basis, he will go in to work in the morning and won't be able to get through the security gate without taking an on the spot drug test. They also have random breathalyzer testing as well.

Public transport drivers (bus, train) are also drug and alcohol tested on a regular basis.

My husbands work has also introduced a total smoking ban on site. People have to tag out of the gate and leave the work site in order to have a smoke break, so times off the job are recorded. They have provided counseling and quit programs for people wanting to quit, free of charge. They put the 'healthy workforce, we care about our employees" spin on it but really everyone knows it is about productivity. Less time on smoke breaks means more time working equalling more $$$$ for the mining company. BHP announced a record profit today so who knows, it could be working!

Most labor and skill related jobs have drug testing. Plumbing companies here in FL all do it.

 

[stephbolt]

I don't know anyone that has ever been drug tested prior to being awarded a job, or even while on the job. Seriously, this makes my mind boggle! Interesting issue...

I find that interesting Echidna! Anyone who works in mining (on site) is drug tested before they are offered a job and will continue to be throughout their employment. My husband is drug tested randomly on a semi regular basis, he will go in to work in the morning and won't be able to get through the security gate without taking an on the spot drug test. They also have random breathalyzer testing as well.

Public transport drivers (bus, train) are also drug and alcohol tested on a regular basis.

My husbands work has also introduced a total smoking ban on site. People have to tag out of the gate and leave the work site in order to have a smoke break, so times off the job are recorded. They have provided counseling and quit programs for people wanting to quit, free of charge. They put the 'healthy workforce, we care about our employees" spin on it but really everyone knows it is about productivity. Less time on smoke breaks means more time working equalling more $$$$ for the mining company. BHP announced a record profit today so who knows, it could be working!

Most labor and skill related jobs have drug testing. Plumbing companies here in FL all do it.

It's definitely not specific to labor and skill related jobs in the US. I work in the chemical industry, just got offered a new job. I'm required to have a drug test and a physical before starting, and if I exhibit suspicious behavior in the future will be required to be tested again. Employees of my company who work in a chemical manufacturing plant are also subject to random drug tests regularly.

 

[dragonfly411]

Steph - I hear ya! I think nurses are required to take tests regularly too.

 

[Tacori E-ring]

Steph - I hear ya! I think nurses are required to take tests regularly too.

I will be working in a rehab in the fall and I am drug tested AND have to undergo an extensive background check. I think testing depends on the profession and where you work.

 

[Echidna]

I don't know anyone that has ever been drug tested prior to being awarded a job, or even while on the job. Seriously, this makes my mind boggle! Interesting issue...

I find that interesting Echidna! Anyone who works in mining (on site) is drug tested before they are offered a job and will continue to be throughout their employment. My husband is drug tested randomly on a semi regular basis, he will go in to work in the morning and won't be able to get through the security gate without taking an on the spot drug test. They also have random breathalyzer testing as well.

Public transport drivers (bus, train) are also drug and alcohol tested on a regular basis.

My husbands work has also introduced a total smoking ban on site. People have to tag out of the gate and leave the work site in order to have a smoke break, so times off the job are recorded. They have provided counseling and quit programs for people wanting to quit, free of charge. They put the 'healthy workforce, we care about our employees" spin on it but really everyone knows it is about productivity. Less time on smoke breaks means more time working equalling more $$$$ for the mining company. BHP announced a record profit today so who knows, it could be working!

HOT, I'm clearly not hanging out with the right people It makes lots of sense that people in life-threatening positions (e.g. working in or around heavy equipment, dealing with critically ill patients, dealing with mental health like Tacori, etc.) are subject to such tests.

I do like the idea of recording smoking break times as "time off", but I'm pretty sure BHP isn't in it for the health benefits!

 

[Laila619]

There's a big difference between discriminating against someone who is sick (who would ever choose to be sick?), and someone who chooses to smoke. And yes, I believe smoking is a choice. Nobody shoved a cigarette in their mouth in the first place. If they developed an addiction, it's still their responsiblity to seek help if they really want to quit. If they dont, that's their choice.

It's not a fair comparison. I dont know anyone who would choose to be sick.

Addiction IS an illness of the brain.

You might have a drink every once in a while. Consider yourself lucky that the area of the brain that controls addiction didn't light up like wildfire and make you NEED alcohol.

There are many people who choose to be sick, when they aren't in their right mind. Mental illness causes this everyday, millions of times per day. Ever see someone with bipolar disorder or schizophrenia say they're aren't sick and stop taking all of their meds? I have. So, no, addiction isn't the same as heart disease, but it is almost exactly the same as any other mental illness. Unless you are arguing that mental illness isn't real and that it is a choice, then it is to be accepted that addiction is a very real illness of the brain.

Yes, addiction is an illness. BUT, obviously no one *made* a smoker light up his first cigarette. It was a choice to do so, which is what led to the addiction/illness. So it was preventable, which cannot really be said about mental illness.

 

[Tacori E-ring]

Laila619, you believe addiction is preventable, is only your opinion, not scientific reasoning. Our culture glorifies tobacco and alcohol use. Marketing, big business, government, advertising, manufactors, farmers all get a piece of it. Wars have been funded.

I am not saying addicts are not responsible for their actions, but I don't think it is fair to dismiss their disease as a bad choice. More often than not, addicts also have a mental illness as well.

 

[MonkeyPie]

Laila619, you believe addiction is preventable, is only your opinion, not scientific reasoning. Our culture glorifies tobacco and alcohol use. Marketing, big business, government, advertising, manufactors, farmers all get a piece of it. Wars have been funded.

I am not saying addicts are not responsible for their actions, but I don't think it is fair to dismiss their disease as a bad choice. More often than not, addicts also have a mental illness as well.

Sure it is - if they had a reason to never take a puff or a sip (like some religions), then they would have never been exposed to that which triggered their disease. Unless you think it would manifest elsewhere all by itself.

 

[Tacori E-ring]

Laila619, you believe addiction is preventable, is only your opinion, not scientific reasoning. Our culture glorifies tobacco and alcohol use. Marketing, big business, government, advertising, manufactors, farmers all get a piece of it. Wars have been funded.

I am not saying addicts are not responsible for their actions, but I don't think it is fair to dismiss their disease as a bad choice. More often than not, addicts also have a mental illness as well.

Sure it is - if they had a reason to never take a puff or a sip (like some religions), then they would have never been exposed to that which triggered their disease. Unless you think it would manifest elsewhere all by itself.

Very few are in isolated society. Muslims can be "saved" by their culture. Amish would also be a religion that "protects" the addiction disease but it is not really clear cut. For example, there is study to support that many Asians cannot metabolize alcohol properly. They get flush and sick, so there are less alcoholics b/c of this. BUT, studies also show that Asian-Americans don't have a significant lower rate of alcoholism like Asians, which could argue that environment trumps genetics. It is a complicated issue and no one can agree on how it is caused.

The American culture is like a pressure cooker that FEEDS addiction. Work addiction is another example of something that is frequently found here, but not in other countries. Corporate America feeds into and rewards work addiction. People with addiction issues will often times manifest their addictions in other forms or process addictions (ex. food, shopping, exercise, etc).

I am not naive to think my child will NEVER have a sip of alcohol or a puff of tobacco. I certainly hope that doesn't trigger anything but I just think people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. If someone REALLY believes that addiction is a disease and accepts that, there needs to be some compassion.

 

[softly softly]

I don't know anyone that has ever been drug tested prior to being awarded a job, or even while on the job. Seriously, this makes my mind boggle! Interesting issue...

I find that interesting Echidna! Anyone who works in mining (on site) is drug tested before they are offered a job and will continue to be throughout their employment. My husband is drug tested randomly on a semi regular basis, he will go in to work in the morning and won't be able to get through the security gate without taking an on the spot drug test. They also have random breathalyzer testing as well.

Public transport drivers (bus, train) are also drug and alcohol tested on a regular basis.

My husbands work has also introduced a total smoking ban on site. People have to tag out of the gate and leave the work site in order to have a smoke break, so times off the job are recorded. They have provided counseling and quit programs for people wanting to quit, free of charge. They put the 'healthy workforce, we care about our employees" spin on it but really everyone knows it is about productivity. Less time on smoke breaks means more time working equalling more $$$$ for the mining company. BHP announced a record profit today so who knows, it could be working!

My husband works for a mining company and goes through a similar routine each day. I will say though, depending on the company, OH&S can sometimes get a touch ridiculous. At the last company my husband worked for they refused to issue short sleeved shirts because the OH&S manager deemed the risk of an employee not applying sunscreen, eventually getting skin cancer and then suing the company an unacceptably high risk . However I do completely agree with the mining industries stance on drugs and it has given my husband an extraordinary ability to estimate his blood alcohol content when not at work.

What I have always found interesting is the way perception of work place danger shapes policy within industries. Underground mining in particular is seen as being a dangerous occupation and is now regulated accordingly. Building sites however, which to me appear to be equally dangerous don't come in for such scrutiny and therefore their policies seem somewhat lax in comparison.

HOT does your husband do Fly in Fly out ex Perth?

 

[Lisa Loves Shiny]

I don't smoke but hate the Big Brother Regime. If society does not want anyone to smoke then make it illegal, and stop accepting all the tax money from cigarette sales. Just sayin.....

 

[Clairitek]

I don't know anyone that has ever been drug tested prior to being awarded a job, or even while on the job. Seriously, this makes my mind boggle! Interesting issue...

I find that interesting Echidna! Anyone who works in mining (on site) is drug tested before they are offered a job and will continue to be throughout their employment. My husband is drug tested randomly on a semi regular basis, he will go in to work in the morning and won't be able to get through the security gate without taking an on the spot drug test. They also have random breathalyzer testing as well.

Public transport drivers (bus, train) are also drug and alcohol tested on a regular basis.

My husbands work has also introduced a total smoking ban on site. People have to tag out of the gate and leave the work site in order to have a smoke break, so times off the job are recorded. They have provided counseling and quit programs for people wanting to quit, free of charge. They put the 'healthy workforce, we care about our employees" spin on it but really everyone knows it is about productivity. Less time on smoke breaks means more time working equalling more $$$$ for the mining company. BHP announced a record profit today so who knows, it could be working!

Most labor and skill related jobs have drug testing. Plumbing companies here in FL all do it.

It's definitely not specific to labor and skill related jobs in the US. I work in the chemical industry, just got offered a new job. I'm required to have a drug test and a physical before starting, and if I exhibit suspicious behavior in the future will be required to be tested again. Employees of my company who work in a chemical manufacturing plant are also subject to random drug tests regularly.

My husband is a chemical engineer and has had two jobs since graduating from college. He has been drug tested for both. One was a huge global corporation and the other was a small (under 30 employees) local company. I was also drug tested (and had a physical) before I officially started working for my $1billion+ corporation. I am not in what would be considered a labor job. I was not at all surprised to be subjected to a drug test. Like StephB0lt, if I exhibit odd behavior and signs of drug use I can be subjected to another one. The policy is the same for the techs, who I suppose would be considered to be in a skilled labor job. They have the initial drug test when they start the job and can be tested again if they behave suspiciously.

 

[hawaiianorangetree]

Softly, my husband works on the kwinana strip and gets to come home every day which is pretty lucky considering most people in mining are in F/I F/O positions.

 

[softly softly]

Softly, my husband works on the kwinana strip and gets to come home every day which is pretty lucky considering most people in mining are in F/I F/O positions.

Yes very lucky! My husband is FIFO out of Kal and we live in the Eastern States

 

[slg47]

well in case anyone wants to work for Leon Mege...this is from his website

We do and certainly will discriminate against smokers - if you want to breathe toxic fumes please do it somewhere else.

 

[House Cat]

To respond to the legality argument, it is perfectly legal. There is a great deal of misconception over what is legal with respect to employer/employee relationships in the US. Private employers in the US can discriminate for any reason they want unless it is relates to a protected class (race, sex, religion, age). If a private company only wants to hire people who's favorite color is blue, that's perfectly legal. Just because it is legal to do something (smoke), doesn't mean it is a right that can be enforced in the workplace. Whether it is right or wrong is up for debate, but under current law in the US this policy is completely legal.

Wow, I'm really shocked by this. In the UK there is almost no job you can discriminate in any way on, our labour laws are extremly protective of the employee.

Just out of interest, if I was drug-tested by a company I would test positive for narcotics I presume given that I take the equivalent of 60mg morphine a day for my spinal problems. I've done this for over 7 years and I function perfectly normally on them. Would I fail the test? Would I be less likely to be employed? What about having bipolar disorder - would that count against me?

If you have a prescription for the meds that show up on your drug test, they say you have passed. Of course, they may not hire you if you have benzo's in your system, because then they know you suffer from anxiety. They may not want to hire someone who suffers from chronic pain either, so if they see opiates, they may choose not to hire, prescription or not.

I would never reveal my bipolar diagnosis to a potential employer unless I was going to work for an organization like NAMI or DBSA. Stigma is still alive an well in this country. It is still believed that I will shoot up a school or drown my children by half of the people living here. This is just one small example; I recently stopped listening to a local radio station because the morning show did a segment on a donut shop that was mental hospital/illness themed. At one point one of the dj's was speaking to a caller who was a psych nurse. The dj was literally referring to people with bipolar disorder as "crack pots" and "nut jobs." He then went on to ask the psych nurse if people with bipolar disorder would have the ability to understand the concept of a "bipolar donut." So as long as the media is promoting this attitude, our employers won't be too open minded to hiring people with our diagnosis.

There would be no way for me to prove that the potential employer chose not to hire me due to my diagnosis. They know this and that is where things get very touchy.

Two posts have quoted another post of mine on this thread and have explained to me that mental illness is chronic, difficult to live with, and has no cure. This leads me to believe that my language in this post must have been ambiguous and possibly insulting.

I have bipolar disorder, type I. When I say that I wouldn't reveal my diagnosis to an employer here in the states, I'm literally speaking of my own diagnosis. I was not trying to give advice or speak for anyone else.

The thing about smoking is that most people start smoking at an age where judgement is not fully developed yet, the teenage years. There is very real proof that the brain isn't fully developed until the age of 25 and the area that governs judgement is one of the areas that doesn't fully develop until then. This is why teenagers are willing to take risks that we adults would never take. This is why some of us look back on our teenage years and wonder how we ever survived.

I'm happy to see that a lot of our teenagers SEEM to be more educated and less likely to smoke nowadays. This could be my own myopic view due to living with my children and seeing the company they choose. Of course their friends wouldn't smoke in front of me... But it seems to me that smoking is less popular than it was twenty years ago. In California, they've been really cracking down on smoking in public places and raising the prices of cigarettes. It's almost making it not worth it for people to smoke anymore anyway. I think tobacco free hiring is just one more link in the chain.

Personally, I wish that they would make tobacco illegal. There is no other addiction that is more deadly. Over 400,000 people die from it per year. That is more than all of the other addictions combined. To me, this speaks to tobacco's extreme addictive quality. If it were so easy for people to just quit, I do think that at least half of these people would have done it a long time ago.

 

[Tacori E-ring]

Personally, I wish that they would make tobacco illegal. There is no other addiction that is more deadly. Over 400,000 people die from it per year. That is more than all of the other addictions combined. To me, this speaks to tobacco's extreme addictive quality. If it were so easy for people to just quit, I do think that at least half of these people would have done it a long time ago.

Actually alcohol is probably the most dangerous addiction and through my studies I often think life would be better if it were illegal. THAT will never happen, but people underestimate the danger b/c it is so socially embedded into our culture. Most people don't realize how many ounces (or should I say little?) one drink is. Moderate-to-heavy drinking can damage the digestive organs, nervous system, reproductive system, systemic problems, mental/emotional effects, certain cancers, cause cardiovascular disease, as well as permanent brain damage ("wet brain"). Alcohol is tricky b/c it causes so many deaths but usually the deaths aren't linked to the alcohol abuse and/or dependence. Alcohol is a drug and when abused is very dangerous.

 

[Dancing Fire]

what's the big deal?...our President smokes.