Wow They Are Really Serious - smokers not hired - page 6
by LemonIndiscretion | 11,003 Views | 61 Comments
....About employees not smoking!!! I just applied for a Student Nurse Associate position at a hospital affiliated with the organization that runs all the big hospitals in my area- (basically everyone in my state who works in... Read More
- 4Mar 14, '12 by Patti_RNHospitals should consider the neighbors when they implement a non-smoking policy on their campus. I worked at a hospital where such a policy was in force and it did stop the employees from smoking on the hospital property--but what did the smokers do? They hoofed across the street to the residential sidewalk and lit up. After puffing away, what did they do? Threw the butts on the sidewalk, on the neighbors' lawns, on the neighbors' driveways. The piles of cigarette butts were disgusting. The neighbors complained to the hospital, but nothing was done. If I lived there, I'd install lawn sprinklers that started automatically with motion detectors.
- 0Mar 15, '12 by PangtidorBefore they enforced tobacco free in my hospital, the smokers will go to the smoking area every 2-3 hours for 15 minutes (night shift). "My patients are ok, they have been taken care of, is it ok if I go smoke? Call me if they need anything." When you said no, they will be cranky for the rest of the shift. The hospital actually did the voting to all of the employees on whether or not we keep the smoking area. Most of the employees voted no, they created smoking cessation program with support group and patches. The health insurance premium increased $20 per paid period for the smokers. With the tobacco free policy, they have to clock out and smoke out of the property. Within a month, neighbors sent complain letters to the hospital for getting the smokers smoke in their property. I don't care with your smoking habit as long as it doesn't interfere with your working performance. For the birth control thing, it turns into the political agenda, stirring people opinion to get the people's vote. It is a freedom country, if your religion against contraceptive you have the right not to use one. For the employers, it is against the people rights on freedom of religion if they enforced their religion practice to their employees. It is a really pathetic policy when you see they just transfer the child molester priests to another church just to moleste other kids. The government wants the contraceptive to be covered by the insurance, even the insurance companies finds it cheaper in long run to do so. It is YOUR CHOICE if you want to use it or not. The contraceptive pills aren't merely to control the pregnancy too and we know that.
- 2Mar 15, '12 by OCNRN63Quote from Patti_RNEvery time a smoker says what they do doesn't hurt anyone else, I want to throw this in their face. If smoking really isn't disgusting, why don't smokers hold onto their butts, instead of throwing them on the sidewalk, rolling down the car window to throw them out, etc.? Could it be they think the butts are just as nasty as everyone else?Hospitals should consider the neighbors when they implement a non-smoking policy on their campus. I worked at a hospital where such a policy was in force and it did stop the employees from smoking on the hospital property--but what did the smokers do? They hoofed across the street to the residential sidewalk and lit up. After puffing away, what did they do? Threw the butts on the sidewalk, on the neighbors' lawns, on the neighbors' driveways. The piles of cigarette butts were disgusting. The neighbors complained to the hospital, but nothing was done. If I lived there, I'd install lawn sprinklers that started automatically with motion detectors.
Keep your butts to yourself and stop littering!
- 2Mar 15, '12 by Marshall1I do not smoke, never have but both my parents did and both died from lung cancer..that being said, I do not agree with hospitals no hiring smokers...if they want to make the campus non-smoking I understand..it's a health care facility...but no business has the right, in my opinion, to dictate what someone does before/after work (legal of course) in their car or home. The argument that smokers miss more work or have more insurance claims, is, by and large, a crock of crap...I've been in nursing for several decades now and nurses with childcare issues missed more work by far than any smoker I worked with. I am not saying that is a bad thing for someone to call out because of the child - I'm just pointing out lack of baby sitters, child illnesses, pregnancy, and the like contributed to most, if not all, the call outs, time off on one unit I worked on for over a year. So, are employers going to start telling nurses with children they can't be hired or if they get pregnant thats it? Depression and anxiety are a large part of why nurses call out and/or quit now - burnout, stress, the nursing school versus the reality of nursing in 2012 is a shock for many. This is, again, my opinion but I think we are on a slippery slope with this issue. And there are hospitals in Ga. that test for nictoine - several in the Atlanta area.
- 1Mar 15, '12 by I love my cat!More and more Hospitals are refusing to hire smokers. I am 100% behind this, too. Hospitals have every right to ban such toxic substances. At will work means that-AT WILL. Employers can hire/fire you for any reason (within the law). Guess many are choosing to ditch smoking.
Smoking is not a right, a protected class or a special privilege. Even those addicted to nicotine will lose that fight in court-it's been fought/tried and has lost every single time. Anyone that has a clue about the Constitution knows that smoking is not mentioned anywhere in either constitution. Nevertheless, some people may claim that there is a fundamental right to smoke. These claims are usually made in one of two ways: (1) that the fundamental right to privacy in the state or federal constitution includes the right to smoke, or (2) that clauses in the state and federal constitutions granting equal protection provide special protection for smokers.
Neither of these claims has any legal basis. Never has been, never will be.
Many University campuses are doing the same thing.
It is about time. I LOVE it!!
- 0May 8, '12 by bethnjohnnyA new co-worker of mine had the same problem. She used to smoke. She tried the tryecig4free which is a vapor cigarette with a tank you fill your own nicotine with. She is now a "non smoker" so could honestly say she doesn't smoke. But I do agree with that. How can we make a difference in lives if we are too ashamed ourselves. I make home visits and I can't tell you how many times patients were not educated on smoking cessation because the nurses didn't feel comfortable telling patients to quit when they were doing it as well.
- 0May 8, '12 by NicuGalThe biggest hospital in this area has this policy in place. Their point is that they are the largest heart facility in the area and their staff should be heart healthy. Keeps insurance premiums down I guess. And if you have HTN, obesity, etc, to get the lower rate on insurance you have to be enrolled in some type of EHP and be compliant. Guess if you want to work somewhere bad enough you'll comply.
- 0May 8, '12 by AutymnMomRN said:
>>>>Like I have said before, they need to start monitoring for other unhealthful activities like eating fast food. Or weighing everyone and if you are over a certain weight, you can't work. "<<<<
Depending on the source, supposedly 45 to 60 percent of licensed nurses currently in the workforce are overweight and/OR obese. One recent report:
January 30, 2012
(ABC News) Researchers at the University of Maryland’s School of Nursing found that 55 percent of the 2,103 female nurses they surveyed were obese...
With the reality of the economic times, this issue may become a formally recognized part of hiring decisions.
I wouldn't be surprised if it is already not one of many items surveyed on potential new candidates in the health field. Some folks think they may be missing out of positions for which they are good candidates for because they are older. It could very well be that older nurses may also (I know, not everyone.) be somewhat noticeably overweight.
As management comes to the conclusion it in any way affects the bottom line - more call-outs with common colds/ailments, slower production, higher risk for safety etc - just a few of the various 'reasons' they could utilize in strategic hiring practices, then weight profiling will occur. That is why there is a contingent of people in the U.S. becoming activists against it.
The media portrays the extreme cases, ie severely overweight persons who are now having to pay for two seats on an airline or not being allowed to board at all etc. Passing physical exams regarding maximum weight may become a corporate mandate, not simply something that is 'encouraged.'Last edit by Autymn on May 8, '12
- 0May 8, '12 by exit96Quote from LemonIndiscretionBig hospital system in Lansing, tests for nicotine. No hiring if you test positive. It amazes me how many people are on the "crucify the smokers" bandwagon, not realizing the "can" that has been opened. Watch out if you are "fat, high cholesterol etc>>>"....About employees not smoking!!!I just applied for a Student Nurse Associate position at a hospital affiliated with the organization that runs all the big hospitals in my area- (basically everyone in my state who works in healthcare has at one time done some training at one of the hospitals or worked for the hospitals) and even before I even filled out the application online a huge notification pops up that reads something likeATTENTION YOU MUST ANSWER THE QUESTION ABOUT TOBACCO USE, as of 1/1/2012 X WILL NO LONGER HIRE USERS OF TOBACCO PRODUCTSit was in a huge box in big red lettersI just found this interesting because I am a former smoker and just quit about 2 years ago. I want to hear what you guys think.
- 1May 8, '12 by PennyWiseIts hard to take facilities that serve burgers/fries/cola and pizza in their cafeteria seriously when they are banning anything for health reasons.
Even harder to take them seriously when you notice how dirty they let their establishment be, all the while making more and more cuts to maintenance and environmental services.
It is plain to see, there is a hidden agenda that has nill to do with healthcare costs.
I worked at a facility that took the "Smoke Free Campus" campaign very seriously (well, maybe not, you be the judge):
When it all first started, they fired more than a few workers for smoking on hospital grounds. A few were fired for having a cigarette lit while driving out of the parking garage even. This went on for awhile, but eventually things calmed down. They calmed down so much in fact, people were getting away with it over and over, being given limitless 2nd chances for some reasons. Some were fired for it, others were not.
It got to be somewhat like the seatbelt law. If a cop pulls you over and decides they really want to pound you with a hard fine, they can add to the fine by siting you don't have your seatbelt on. If they decide not to, its not as if you are going to complain "But officer, you didn't even notice I don't have my seatbelt on." It all depends on what kind of mood they are in.
Same thing with the whole "evict the smokers movement." Its just one more avenue for them to use when they want to get rid of you. If they don't want to get rid of you, there is nothing to be worried about.
So..........if you call off a lot/have a bad attitude/are over 40/have maxed out your pay scale AND SMOKE.............beware. If you are not in any of those categories, this whole conversation is much ado about nothing.
We all float down here.