Hospitals discriminating against medical conditions..?

[CosmoRN77]

If a person has a medical condition and is prescribed medical cannabis by a medical doctor would it not be discrimitory for a nurse to be denied employment? Nurses should have the same rights as any other individuals that are not nurses. This is common sense. A nurse should have the right to chose either man made chemicals (which can lead to absolute dependance) or chose naturally occurring medicines such as cannabis (which is much less likely for dependance). Why are we being denied this right? If you say its because there is no test to measure if a nurse is high on the job or not then guess what? Its not the nurses fault this test does not exist so why does the nurse have to limit their options for medical care? Having said that I feel hospitals are discriminating against medical conditions and I don't even know how they are not being prosecuted for this. Medical cannabis is prescribed by a medical doctor and therefore is in FACT a medication! Hospitals are not hiring and firing people with medical prescriptions.

[NurseDiane]

Even as a non-smoker, I have a problem with that. If you don't smell like an ash tray, what's the problem? I knew several smokers who I never knew smoked until I went out with them, and they smoked when they drank.

This practice is discriminatory, and this is coming from a non-smoker. I don't like it when other people stink like an ash tray, but something could be written into the employment contract about smelling like cigarettes. What do they do if an employee has bad B.O. or halitosis?

What are employers going to do next? Start doing cheek swabs to keep DNA in the employee files?

[WookieeRN, BSN, MSN, RN]

I would actually have a big problem with that. I don't smoke, but still think it is discriminatory. Smoking cigarettes is not illegal. It would be the same as having a job offer taken away because you have a glass or two of wine with dinner on Saturday nights.

As long as you're not smoking at work, having an employer tell you that you can't smoke at all is really riding the line with discrimination. What if you quit smoking 2 weeks prior to the drug screen & tested positive for nicotine?

Employers don't care if you quit 2 weeks ago, to be honest. If it shows up on the test you're out. And it's been held up in court, to boot. Unfortunate but I guess as long as it isn't a protected class they can discriminate all they want

[elkpark]

I would actually have a big problem with that. I don't smoke, but still think it is discriminatory. Smoking cigarettes is not illegal. It would be the same as having a job offer taken away because you have a glass or two of wine with dinner on Saturday nights.

As long as you're not smoking at work, having an employer tell you that you can't smoke at all is really riding the line with discrimination. What if you quit smoking 2 weeks prior to the drug screen & tested positive for nicotine?

Even as a non-smoker, I have a problem with that. If you don't smell like an ash tray, what's the problem? I knew several smokers who I never knew smoked until I went out with them, and they smoked when they drank.

This practice is discriminatory, and this is coming from a non-smoker. I don't like it when other people stink like an ash tray, but something could be written into the employment contract about smelling like cigarettes. What do they do if an employee has bad B.O. or halitosis?

What are employers going to do next? Start doing cheek swabs to keep DNA in the employee files?

You have a right to smoke, and employers have a right to choose not hire smokers. We all make choices, and those choices have consequences. Smokers are not a protected class.

[ixchel]

Even as a non-smoker, I have a problem with that. If you don't smell like an ash tray, what's the problem? I knew several smokers who I never knew smoked until I went out with them, and they smoked when they drank.

This practice is discriminatory, and this is coming from a non-smoker. I don't like it when other people stink like an ash tray, but something could be written into the employment contract about smelling like cigarettes. What do they do if an employee has bad B.O. or halitosis?

What are employers going to do next? Start doing cheek swabs to keep DNA in the employee files?

Employers care because they are footing part of the health insurance bill and they have to pay to cover shifts for call-outs when the smoker is sick.

[klone, MSN, RN]

I would actually have a big problem with that. I don't smoke, but still think it is discriminatory. Smoking cigarettes is not illegal. It would be the same as having a job offer taken away because you have a glass or two of wine with dinner on Saturday nights.

As long as you're not smoking at work, having an employer tell you that you can't smoke at all is really riding the line with discrimination. What if you quit smoking 2 weeks prior to the drug screen & tested positive for nicotine?

It's not discrimination in the legal sense because cigarette smokers are not a protected class.

Cotinine testing is quantitative, meaning the results can differentiate between an active current smoker, someone who recently quit, and someone who has secondary exposure.

Every HR website I've seen where the company does not hire smokers, specifically states that before you apply online, and most specify that you need to be smoke free for at least 30 days.

[klone, MSN, RN]

Employers care because they are footing part of the health insurance bill and they have to pay to cover shifts for call-outs when the smoker is sick.

According to the CDC, $170 million is spent in direct medical care that's attributable to smoking, and an additional $156 BILLION in lost productivity due to smoking-related illnesses and death. In the US. Annually.

One study found that each smoker costs employers an additional $6,000/year in healthcare costs and lost productivity. And that also takes into consideration the cost savings towards pensions because smokers die sooner.

[NurseDiane]

Employers don't care about anything, period. They care about money. That's it.

In my limited online research, it is interesting that the ONLY employers I found to have nicotine policies are healthcare related, specifically hospitals.

What would be a very interesting case is one involving someone having a job offer rescinded based on the smoking/nicotine found in a drug screen when they quit smoking a few weeks ago. It is well known that nicotine is extremely addictive. Persons who are presumed to have an addiction or still using, when they have been rehabilitated, ARE protected under the American With Disabilities Act. The law specifically states "illegal" substances, but addiction to nicotine is certainly a strong one.

I don't smoke and actually cannot stand the smell of it, so it's not like I am trying to defend a smoking habit. It's a smelly, dirty & expensive habit.