Stupid q's: Has smoking cigarettes kept you from getting a job? - page 4

by mls4455

12,532 Views | 73 Comments

Do any of you smoke cigarettes? And has it kept you from getting a job?... Read More


  1. 2
    Your point is valid, however, studies have showed (be honest, we didn't need the studies to tell us) smoking causes many of the most preventable diseases. Furthermore, there is second hand and third hand smoke to consider.... Yes, third hand. Smoking is one of those things you just cannot keep to yourself. They have discovered the remaining smell is not just a smell, but actual nicotine particles that latch on to dust in the air, clothing, furniture, etc. and can make its way into our lungs. Now, we know that employers want to make sure that their employees are capable of doing their jobs. If employees partake in smoking, which causes a preventable consequence, employers want to steer clear of having to be too financially involved because you have publicly shown yourself to be a liability. By the way the insurance companies are really the drivers in this race. The corporate health screenings I do, like so many others, are just to save face with the insurance companies, by allowing the employer to receive a discount on premiums which they then pass down to employees.
    KelRN215 and TheCommuter like this.
  2. 1
    Quote from ColleenRN2B
    LOL, discrimination applies to sex, race, etc. ie: PROTECTED class. CHOOSING to smoke doesn't give someone that
    Forgive me for making the joke then. My employers have never had an issue. They can provide assistance to quit, but they cannot refuse to hire you based on the fact that you smoke. Same with age, gender, etc. Any interview/employment I've had has never stated the job would be unprotected based on the fact that someone smokes. Its a human rights issue.
    joanna73 likes this.
  3. 1
    Quote from RNJHUPHL
    I started to see that requirement and talked to some of my instructors who smoked. Where I live my state is an at will employer/employee state so in essence these practices are allowed. I am still debating whether it is right. BTW, I don't smoke and never tried but I don't know if I'm in the business of forcing others to stop something that may or may not kill them. We don't arrest diabetics so why are we doing this to smokers? This also brings to mind the abuse charges to parents with overweight kids. There are chubby kids who eventually lean out when they get older does this mean that the parents are at fault if they truly are raising a healthy child?
    Second hand smoke (even the smell could cause an asthma attack in some) is harmful to others, while a diabetic might be harmful just to self. If it's unprofessional to wear heavy fragrance, than it's unprofessional to come to work smelling like an ashtray.
    ShantheRN likes this.
  4. 2
    As much as I hate smokers (personal opinion), not hiring them because they smoke is really dumb. Sure, raise their insurance premiums but if they do their job it's really none of our business.
    AngelicDarkness and joanna73 like this.
  5. 1
    When does the slippery slope end? I'm sure people would be furious if facilities had a known weight policy. Example: if one isn't within a certain weight range, they aren't hired, because they may not be able to function on the job. That's discrimination, same as the smokers. Yes, I too agree that smoking stinks....but that's not a reason to deny someone employment, IMO.
    AngelicDarkness likes this.
  6. 0
    Quote from SweetPEI
    I currently administer nicotine testing. Besides working at a psych hospital, I also do health assessments/screenings for corporations. Depending on if upgraded services are ordered, I have to test for nicotine. This is in addition to basic screening tests (cholesterol, triglycerides, glucose, bmi, etc. its pretty simple. Its a swab like approach. Break the seal and hold it in your mouth (cheek side) for about a minute. Everyone says it tastes awful. Then we send it off to the lab. Nicotine stays in the blood for a good while so its not something one can hide... any employee who refuses is automatically labeled a smoker and charged the highest premium, and of course those who do have nicotine in their system as well. This helps cover all the bases: cigars, snuff, etc. Typically, corporate clients that request nicotine testing are mostly insurance companies and hospitals
    Do you also test for other drugs? What if someone isn't a smoker but they have a major drug problem? Reason I ask is cause I live in Colorado, right by Rose Hospital where that surgical technologist got caught a few years ago, switching her used needles that she used to shoot up with hospital needles and ended up infecting patients with hepatitis. I just thought if the hospital was administering drug tests that wouldn't have happened.
  7. 0
    ASH - EMPLOYMENT POLICIES AGAINST HIRING SMOKERS Section B covers what is truly, by the letter of the law, the protected classes of discrimination. NOT saying I disagree with you about what your state may say, linking this to give an idea of who protected classes are for reference when people toss around the term discrimination.

    Quote from MJeanRN
    I happen to live in a state where employers are not allowed to "discriminate" against smokers. I found out one day while reading one of the state labor laws posters. Guess it depends on how much big tobacco contributes to the local economy/government. Interestingly enough, many of our hospitals have no smoking on-the-premises policies.
  8. 0
    It may be observed that four of the five grounds of unlawful discrimination -- race, sex, age and handicap -- all represent conditions outside an employee's control, and might be described as immutable characteristics which he or she could not change even if wished. Discrimination on such grounds would be unjust and illegal. Discrimination on grounds of religion would violate the fundamental constitutional protection for religious freedom.

    That is taken from the article I posted



    Quote from Amber628
    Hmmm. You can choose things like religion so how is smoking different?
  9. 0
    Quote from ColleenRN2B
    LOL, discrimination applies to sex, race, etc. ie: PROTECTED class. CHOOSING to smoke doesn't give someone that
    You are absolutely right. And not to be argumentative, it IS a choice. A personal choice, just like any other personal choice. Another personal choice would be the kind of car you drive or how a person CHOOSES to drink their coffee. None of the above a protected classes yet when a Jeep driver applies for a job, they aren't given an emissions test nor to make sure they are getting good mileage.
  10. 1
    Actually, smoking is an addiction. Not a choice necessarily. Nicotine is a drug. Food is another addiction for some people. The list is endless.
    AngelicDarkness likes this.


Top