Tobacco free environment and testing for nicotine. Lawful? Thoughts?

Nurses General Nursing

Published

Had a conversation with a co-worker the other day who said he smokes, and he wants to leave current hospital, however, he is seeing more and more that surrounding hospitals / health facilities publicly state "this is a tobacco free environment," and heard that with those places, during a pre-hire health screening, the individual will be tested for nicotine.

I have other colleagues who don't use tobacco products, however, they vape, or are quitting smoking via patches, nicotine gum, etc. Even if he is aiming to quit smoking, and uses non-tobacco products to do this, wouldnt the nicotine still be present during testing? And then wouldnt he fail? I've never had to deal with it so I don't really know what to tell him. 

Has anyone heard of a colleague, or, if you personally had to do nicotine testing during a pre hire health screen and based on those results, employers refused to hire? (No matter HOW the nicotine got into their system - cigs, vape, gum, patches, etc)?  Is there a timeframe that exists where he could just "white knuckle it" through without using ANY nicotine products that would allow him to pass? 

Follow up question (out of curiosity): can a person present a MD note stating that they never used tobacco products / never been a smoker, or maybe they did in the past, and are on the path of quitting (via patches, gum, etc)? and don't currently use? Does that make a difference?

Sorry if that sounds like a terrible question... he does want to quit smoking, and wants to leave current position, however feels stuck, because of the tobacco free policy trend. He feels kinda like "well, whats the point, might as well just keep on doing what I'm doing if it doesnt make a difference." 

Curious what yalls experiences are or if you have any advice. Would appreciate it! Thanks! 

Specializes in Med-Surg, Trauma, Ortho, Neuro, Cardiac.

 My facility since 2013 has screened for by-products of nicotine in their pre-employment urine drug screening and has not hired smokers.  

Apparently some states have laws against this practice, but Florida is not one one of them, and Florida is far from a left-wing state.  

3 Votes

Both hospital systems I’ve worked for required a negative tobacco test.. if it comes back positive you will not be hired. It is what it is. Prior to my healthcare experience, my prior jobs would ask when I signed up for benefits and it was 600$ cheaper per year if you said you didn’t smoke.  But you can’t give discount for a healthy BMI etc because that would be considered discriminatory. I assume. “Pre existing conditions” 

1 Votes

1) Not a protected class

2) Think of the impact on patients with sensitive respiratory systems when cared for by someone who comes in reeking of smoke. Being around anything remotely smokey results in airway problems for me- even just being around someone who just smells like it. (For those who don't physically react to being around smokers with smokey clothes, there's still a general unpleasantness to being cared for by someone whose clothing and breath smell foul.)

3) Higher insurance costs, more sick days, statistically take more breaks during work day

4 Votes
Specializes in orthopedic/trauma, Informatics, diabetes.

I used to be a teacher. This is a state that is a "right to work"  state (I lose my words sometimes and I forget the word that is more descriptive). Because they provided health insurance, they tested for nicotine and adjusted premiums for higher BMIs. 

They started covering weight loss surgery and smoking cessation programs.  

We have a "tobacco-free" policy at my hospital, but, as far as I know, they do not test for nicotine. I am covered by my husband's insurance (he works for federal govt and it's great insurance). 

I don't think it is illegal to test for nicotine if it is a term of employment. 

Specializes in OB-Gyn/Primary Care/Ambulatory Leadership.
12 hours ago, mmc51264 said:

I used to be a teacher. This is a state that is a "right to work"  state (I lose my words sometimes and I forget the word that is more descriptive).

The term you're looking for is "employment at will"

2 Votes
Specializes in Psych, Addictions, SOL (Student of Life).
1 hour ago, klone said:

The term you're looking for is "employment at will"

"Right to Work" states have a law on the books that states and employee does not have to join a labor Union in order to work.

"At will" states allow both the employee and the employer to terminate employment as will (For any reason or noreason at all."

Hppy

1 Votes
Specializes in retired LTC.
23 hours ago, Closed Account 12345 said:

3) Higher insurance costs, more sick days, statistically take more breaks during work day

Die-hard smokers won't eat, won't drink, or won't pee all shift. Yet they'll always manage to get in several cigarette breaks HOWEVER possible.

Something I always found unfair! Yeah, nobody said job environments  were fair. So to prohibit smoking does appear to equal it out a bit. JMHO

+ Add a Comment