1
   

Company Fires All Employees Who Smoke

Forums: News
Email this Topic • Print this Page
 
 
kickycan
 
Reply Tue 25 Jan, 2005 02:52 pm
Michigan Firm Won't Allow Smoking, Even On Employee's Own Time

UPDATED: 1:59 PM EST January 25, 2005

LANSING, Mich. -- Four employees of a health care company have been fired for refusing to take a test to determine whether they smoke cigarettes.

Weyco Inc., a health benefits administrator based in Okemos, Mich., adopted a policy Jan. 1 that allows employees to be fired if they smoke, even if the smoking happens after business hours or at home.

Company founder Howard Weyers has said the anti-smoking rule was designed to shield the firm from high health care costs. "I don't want to pay for the results of smoking," he said.

http://www.wral.com/news/4126577/detail.html

This is complete and utter f*cking bullshit, in my opinion. What's yours?
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 3,082 • Replies: 55
No top replies

 
Francis
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jan, 2005 02:55 pm
Do you fear for your job, Kicky? Twisted Evil
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jan, 2005 02:56 pm
Mine is the same as yours.

I can appreciate the irony of someone being a chronic smoker while working at a health care company, but this is all about the cost of the benefits, I think.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jan, 2005 02:59 pm
Well, what about car drivers, or athlets (re risk of accidents!), fast food eaters etc etc - name it?
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jan, 2005 03:02 pm
How about people who have unprotected sex with multiple anonymous partners outside of work?
0 Replies
 
Letty
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jan, 2005 03:03 pm
Kicky, I believe that ought to be challenged in court. It is just one more example of how ridiculous things have gotten in the work place. Whether one smokes or not is not the issue. The issue is what will constitute a pink slip in the future--being overweight? Evil or Very Mad
0 Replies
 
Bella Dea
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jan, 2005 03:03 pm
damn....bad edit job....
0 Replies
 
Bella Dea
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jan, 2005 03:04 pm
There was a company, I think here in Michigan, who fired some chick because she ate a BLT in the lunchroom, which is suppose to be pork free for the Muslim (is this right?) employees. What happened to her right to eat pork? She has just as much right to eat a pork chop as the Muslims (again, is this the right group?) do to not eat pork. He claimed that he wanted to cater to all religious observations. The man refused to create a seperate lunch room for the pork eaters. Rolling Eyes I would have told him I had the Pork Religion and that I needed my own lunch space.
0 Replies
 
blueveinedthrobber
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jan, 2005 03:05 pm
Re: Company Fires All Employees Who Smoke
kickycan wrote:
Michigan Firm Won't Allow Smoking, Even On Employee's Own Time

UPDATED: 1:59 PM EST January 25, 2005

LANSING, Mich. -- Four employees of a health care company have been fired for refusing to take a test to determine whether they smoke cigarettes.

Weyco Inc., a health benefits administrator based in Okemos, Mich., adopted a policy Jan. 1 that allows employees to be fired if they smoke, even if the smoking happens after business hours or at home.

Company founder Howard Weyers has said the anti-smoking rule was designed to shield the firm from high health care costs. "I don't want to pay for the results of smoking," he said.

http://www.wral.com/news/4126577/detail.html

This is complete and utter f*cking bullshit, in my opinion. What's yours?


agreed bullshit. bullshit on the blt as well.
0 Replies
 
Synonymph
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jan, 2005 03:08 pm
Kristie wrote:
I would have told him I had the Pork Religion and that I needed my own lunch space.


The Pork Religion Shocked
0 Replies
 
Bella Dea
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jan, 2005 03:17 pm
Cinnesthesia wrote:
Kristie wrote:
I would have told him I had the Pork Religion and that I needed my own lunch space.


The Pork Religion Shocked


Laughing
It is just as absurd as the "rule" that is discriminating against pork eaters.

Wanna be fair? Seperate the current lunch room with two seperate sets of tables, microwave, whatever. Pork on one side, no pork on the other.

Laughing
0 Replies
 
Francis
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jan, 2005 03:20 pm
vegetarians on another. I'll end eating alone! Crying or Very sad
0 Replies
 
Merry Andrew
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jan, 2005 03:21 pm
This must be challenged in court. I believe there is a precedent. Some years ago a large American city (I forget which one; it may have been my home town) contemplated requiring all police officers to be non-smokers. The idea here, too, was that they could be fired for smoking even in the privacy of their home. The city's legal department eventually concluded that such a rule would be constitutionally unenforceable.
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jan, 2005 03:28 pm
Next that company will want to know someone's genetic makeup before hire..
0 Replies
 
Bella Dea
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jan, 2005 03:29 pm
Depends if it is a privately owned company. Apparently, they have different rules and such. The meat deal was up for challenge but they said there was nothing this chick could do because it was a privately owned company. Not sure what all the rules are....
0 Replies
 
Merry Andrew
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jan, 2005 03:57 pm
Kristie wrote:
Depends if it is a privately owned company. Apparently, they have different rules and such. The meat deal was up for challenge but they said there was nothing this chick could do because it was a privately owned company. Not sure what all the rules are....


That doesn't make any sense to me, Kristie. I can see where a privately-owned company has the right to refuse employment to a pork-eater or a cigarette-smoker. But once that employee has been hired -- unless his/her habits are specifically understood as a violation of the employment contract prior to employment -- there is no way the company can fire the employee for doing something that is neither illegal nor interferes with the completeion of the employee's duties.
0 Replies
 
Bella Dea
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jan, 2005 03:59 pm
The pork eater knew in advance, I think.
0 Replies
 
Slappy Doo Hoo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jan, 2005 04:18 pm
I hate cigarettes, love the ban in Boston in public places...but yes, that is pretty out there. Although I think I recall seeing a job posting in the medical/health care field before requesting non-smokers.
0 Replies
 
rodeman
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jan, 2005 06:13 pm
Slappy:
I too have seen job postings requesting non-smokers, but it appears the company in question is changing horses (rules) in mid-stream. This is total bullsh_t. Hopefully the ACLU will be all over this. What the hell is happening in this country?
0 Replies
 
Letty
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jan, 2005 06:47 pm
I'm with you rodeman. I'm beginning to believe that "the company" is looking for an excuse to downsize. Anyone remember "How the Other Half Lives"?

http://www.yale.edu/amstud/inforev/riis/title.html

Two classes of people. The have's and the have not's.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Another major school shooting today ... Newtown, Conn - Discussion by tsarstepan
T'Pring is Dead - Discussion by Brandon9000
Another Calif. shooting spree: 4 dead - Discussion by Lustig Andrei
Before you criticize the media - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Fatal Baloon Accident - Discussion by 33export
RIP Professor Snape - Alan Rickman Passes at 69 - Discussion by engineer
Fergusonj shooting, autopsy in, all shots from front - Discussion by gungasnake
The Day Ferguson Cops Were Caught in a Bloody Lie - Discussion by bobsal u1553115
Robin Williams is dead - Discussion by Butrflynet
Amanda Berry's desperate 911 call to police - Discussion by smithy988
Amanda Knox - Discussion by JTT
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Company Fires All Employees Who Smoke
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 04/26/2024 at 03:46:58
▲ ▼