Published Jul 4, 2010
NeoNurseTX, RN
1,803 Posts
What are your opinions on hospitals refusing to hire people that use tobacco (either chewing or smoking)? Do you know of any that have this policy?
Our medical center has no smoking in or out allowed but we have just created a policy that checks for tobacco in a UA. Those found positive cannot reapply for employment for one year.
klone, MSN, RN
14,856 Posts
I have a HUGE problem with that. I think smoking is a noxious habit, but until it's made illegal, then IMO no employer should be able to discriminate on the basis of being a tobacco smoker.
The more I think about this, the more I would be inclined to contact the ACLU.
Can someone test positive from second hand smoke from spending several hours in a smoky bar?
TNgirl2010
72 Posts
Seriously? I don't smoke and am all for making hospitals smoke free, but I think it's wrong to refuse to hire smokers. Does this go for all hospital employees, like maintenance people and housekeeping too?
I agree with you guys. What's next, can't drink wine?? It's all employees. I agree that we shouldn't use it at work but what people do legally outside of work is no one's business. And this is coming from someone who abhors the habit.
ACLU wise - we are not forced to work here (and those already working here it will not apply to) so I'm wondering if it is even something they could interfere with.
RNlvn
86 Posts
From the employers side healthy employees are just better for business. The policy however is wrong in so many ways.
What scares me is that I've heard NO ONE complain.
And apparently it's completely legal where I live. I love my job and don't want to be a squeaky wheel because the squeaky wheel gets fired, but this is over the line.
Zookeeper3
1,361 Posts
I know cleveland clinic was transitioning to smoke free... employees had a year to quit and they would to UA testing as well. This may be due to the rising cost of health insurance premiums.
My husbands businness handled that differently though... smokers pay a higher premium. I say add your non diet compliant obese employees as well... those who don't keep thier diabetes undercontrol... hmn, why not DNA testing... there could be more expensive illnesses that are not smoking related, don't hire those people either....
ONe foot on the banana peel.... these insurance companies have too much control.
RN_2012, BSN, RN
154 Posts
Is it possible this allows for cheaper employee health insurances rates for the hospital?
corky1272RN
117 Posts
Yeah, my hospital just emailed all the employees. It is now a new policy there. I don't really agree with it but I don't think it's discrimination. If they don't want to hire blondes (or smokers) that is their choice. Smoking is not protected by the EEOC like sex, race, religion, etc. I do like the suggestion to have smokers and non-compliant employees pay higher premiums though. :confused::confused:
meandragonbrett
2,438 Posts
I don't care if you choose to smoke...that is your decision. I should NOT have to smell it on you while at work nor should the patients.
Fribblet
839 Posts
Seems if they are doing this for cheaper health care premiums or to promote a "healthy" environment, then they should put their money where their mouth is and extend the policy.
No unhealthy snacks, no sodas, no alcohol consumption while off duty, moving traffic violations are grounds for termination, and every employee must have a healthy BMI.
Otherwise, they should f*** off, imo.