Nicotine & Work

[applesxoranges]

So I am wondering on what people think about drug testing for nicotine as a condition of employment? In my area 2 out of 3 hospital systems do it (so about 10 or more hospitals) and I am not sure about the outlaying hospital systems. They don't do random drug tests but they reserve the right to fire you if you use nicotine products while employed. I don't think they do a nicotine drug test if you get injured as it is an additional device that kind of looks like a pregnancy test.

People who were hired in before the ban are grandfathered in.

Any thoughts on the issue? I've seen people complain on marijuana drug testing and nicotine is a legal drug. People are not being hired because they test positive and one system goes as far as to say that they view it as lying on the application if you test positive.

[Nurse SMS, MSN, RN]

WOW - are they doing this in Texas?

They are doing this all over the place.

[TheCommuter, BSN, RN]

WOW - are they doing this in Texas?

Many hospital / healthcare corporations in different states across the country have begun to screen prospective employees for nicotine metabolites. This has been happening for several years.

[Rose_Queen, BSN, MSN, RN]

I have several issues with nicotine testing. For starters they are discriminating based on legal activity done away from the work premises. They have every right to say don't smoke on our property and don't smell of cigarette smoke while on duty. I don't believe they have the right to discriminate because someone smokes on their own time and premises. They'll do it, of course, until they are stopped by a lawsuit or someday when there really is a nursing shortage. Also, some of the testing is serum for nicotine byproducts... this isn't only testing for tobacco use, it tests positive for nicotine replacement. So someone using legal products to stop the behaviour in question also gets penalized. It's a lot of intrusion by the employer into private lives and I think it's wrong. But it is the reality right now.

First, the employer has the right to set conditions of employment. Employees/potential employees must meet those conditions. If someone feels that strongly about smoking, the responsibility of finding a compatible employer is theirs.

Second, smokers are not a protected class; therefore, not hiring them is not discrimination.

[BuckyBadgerRN, ASN, RN]

I really hate when people play the discrimination card. News flash! Smokers (or tobacco users of any sort) are NOT a protected class of citizens. If you don't hire a person based on their sex, race, religious beliefs, etc, then THAT is discrimination. Not hiring a user of a legal substance, on anyone's time, is not a case of discrimination...

I have several issues with nicotine testing. For starters they are discriminating based on legal activity done away from the work premises. They have every right to say don't smoke on our property and don't smell of cigarette smoke while on duty. I don't believe they have the right to discriminate because someone smokes on their own time and premises. They'll do it, of course, until they are stopped by a lawsuit or someday when there really is a nursing shortage. Also, some of the testing is serum for nicotine byproducts... this isn't only testing for tobacco use, it tests positive for nicotine replacement. So someone using legal products to stop the behaviour in question also gets penalized. It's a lot of intrusion by the employer into private lives and I think it's wrong. But it is the reality right now.

[sapphire18]

Like a pp said, slippery slope...