We Are Doomed - Cat Forum : Cat Discussion Forums
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #1 of 15 (permalink) Old 01-25-2005, 11:35 PM Thread Starter
Tom Cat
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 373
We Are Doomed

First off, let me say I don't smoke, but I did in high school and a little in my 20s. This is one of those "It doesn't effect me" type of issues, but I know one day we will all be effected by this kind of scrutiny. Some day soon, everything from health records to DNA tests will become a part of the screening process so companies can discriminate in attempts to finding the "perfect" employee. Already, companies have access to your credit and other sensitive material to weed out potential bad hires.

http://www.lsj.com/apps/pbcs.dll/art...23/1001/news04

Quote:
OKEMOS - Four employees of Okemos-based health benefits administrator Weyco Inc. have been fired for refusing to take a test that would determine whether they smoke cigarettes.

The company instituted a policy on Jan. 1 that makes it a firing offense to smoke - even if done after business hours or at home.

Weyco founder Howard Weyers said previously that he instituted the tough anti-smoking rule to shield his company from high health care costs.

"I don't want to pay for the results of smoking," he said.

The anti-smoking rule led one employee to quit work before the policy went into place.

Since Jan. 1, four more people were shown the door when they balked at the anti-smoking test.

"They were terminated at that point," said Chief Financial Officer Gary Climes.

Even so, Weyco said, the policy has been successful.

Climes estimated that about 18 to 20 of the company's 200 employers were smokers when the policy was announced in 2003.

Of those, as many as 14 quit smoking before the policy went into place.

Weyco offered them smoking cessation help, Climes said.

"That is absolutely a victory," Climes said.
Real nice.
Misery is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 15 (permalink) Old 01-26-2005, 12:33 AM
Premier Cat
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Austin, Tx
Posts: 11,407
WTH, that is crazy!! Drug test, understandle but smoking cigarettes. I mean so many people I know smoke, it's not even funny. This is crazy to me
kitkat is offline  
post #3 of 15 (permalink) Old 01-26-2005, 01:02 AM
Cool Cat
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Alabama
Posts: 1,083
It'd be smarter to just not cover smoking-related health costs.

spike481
Herdmaster of 16 Cats & 1 Dog

"Ever tried to herd cats?"
spike481 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #4 of 15 (permalink) Old 01-26-2005, 03:08 AM Thread Starter
Tom Cat
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 373
Yeah, but down the road is the real problem. Smoking today, what tomorrow? It's already known that life insurance companies want DNA testing as a standard to avoid those who "might" be at higher risk for cancer and other diseases. The day will come when everything you do will be under a microscope and determined a liability to those who loan you money, give you a job, and who knows what else. It started with drug testing, a controversial issue, yet one where the law backs up the issue of illegal substance use. The smoking issue is one that is discriminatory for the fact that cigarettes are legal. I agree that not covering their medical costs is a very valid point, but again, does fast food, alcohol consumption, and any other "unhealthy" activity become a concern for these people as well? It sounds ridiculous, but it's a possibility.
Misery is offline  
post #5 of 15 (permalink) Old 01-26-2005, 05:55 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Wisconsin, USA
Posts: 12,719
What people do on their own time is their own business, as long as it doesn't affect their performance on the job. So, it kinda depends on the thing done, and the job requirements.

There's no easy answer on this. Spike's solution sounds good, but it's not always easy to just not cover smoking-related health costs, because some of those medical problems could have other causes. Another solution that sounds good would be to rate health insurance for risk factors, but then you have the privacy issue to deal with. Plus, the whole idea of insurance is to spread the risk.

I think, in the end, what companies are moving towards is requiring employees to pay a portion of their insurance. Then, if they engage in practices that drive up the cost of premiums, it comes out of their own pocket. But then you penalize everybody for the actions of a few.

If somebody can figure out an answer that would everybody happy, they deserve some kind of prize!
coaster is offline  
post #6 of 15 (permalink) Old 01-26-2005, 07:14 PM
Premier Cat
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Simpsonville, SC
Posts: 3,639
Send a message via AIM to OsnobunnieO
We recently changed our smoking policy at work. Now you can only smoke on your clocked-out lunch breaks, off the property. Not in your car in the parkinglot (like a ton of people were doing when they first changed it).

I had mentioned it to my mom, and she said an uncle of hers or someone worked for a company that did something similar to what the above company did. Except they put notice, then got everyone who smoked into a program to help them quit and after a certain period of time, anyone who smoked (on or off property) was told to find a new job.

At first I didn't agree AT ALL, because honestly what you do at your home on your own time is YOUR business. Then she explained the logic behind it. Smokers tend to get sick more and take more sick days off, use the health insurance more, and when smoking is permitted at work they take more breaks and are less productive. Basically, it was costing him more money to have smokers work for him than it was to put them through the program and keep only nonsmokers.

I'll admit that if I worked someone for say 20 years and all of a sudden was forced out of a job for smoking, I'd be really upset. So I can go either way on this issue. But it IS up to the employer to decide who he wants working for him, because he's the one that signs the checks.

Jessie

"There is no snooze button on a cat who wants breakfast."
OsnobunnieO is offline  
post #7 of 15 (permalink) Old 01-26-2005, 07:19 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Wisconsin, USA
Posts: 12,719
Not being allowed to smoke in your own car is really going too far. Your car is your own property.
coaster is offline  
post #8 of 15 (permalink) Old 01-26-2005, 07:23 PM
Cat Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Fayetteville, Arkansas
Posts: 1,514
It's here -- 1984. When I was on the job hunt in 2003, I turned down one job because they didn't allow smoking before, during, or after work. I don't even smoke! I just thought if they were going to be strict on something like that, what else will they be weird about? Then I saw the job posted again about six months after I turned it down, so I figured it wasn't just me -- someone else took it and thought they were weird too.

I think the bigger problem with this, though, is the insurance companies -- it is really sad that people can be declined health insurance because they've actually had to use their insurance. Sure, smoking causes health problems, but people that go to health clubs can be permanently injured if they hurt their back lifting weights.

And I'd pay a portion of my health insurance any day over having to pay for it all out of pocket -- anyone else ever been turned down by an insurance company? Or have to pay outrages premiums for a pre-existing condition?
Hippyhart is offline  
post #9 of 15 (permalink) Old 01-26-2005, 08:32 PM Thread Starter
Tom Cat
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 373
I can't say. Most of the time you don't get the inside scoop if they turn you down, they give you a BS reason. Just depends. My friend has psoriasis and can't get life insurance from any decent company because of it. They always claim the medicine he has to take (e.g., steroid topicals) is a risk to his health so therefore he's a risk. His wife is on disability because she has a rare form of MS. He's a musician who plays music for eldery people at ball room dances and stuff. A real hard working guy who has so much on his shoulders, between doing all the yard work, certain household chores she can't do, working crazy hours, and so on. They have a 13 year old daughter, so if he were to get killed, his wife and daughter would be screwed.
Misery is offline  
post #10 of 15 (permalink) Old 01-26-2005, 09:45 PM
Premier Cat
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Simpsonville, SC
Posts: 3,639
Send a message via AIM to OsnobunnieO
Quote:
Originally Posted by timskitties
Not being allowed to smoke in your own car is really going too far. Your car is your own property.
I agree, but when its in the parking lot at work, its ON their property. Plus, people were just congregating in groups in the parking lot which looked even worse than one or two out back or on the side of the hospital.

Apparently customers were complaining. I don't know what specifically they saw or didn't like, but a few of the surveys we sent home had comments like "the tech was great, but she smokes!" so I guess people came into rooms smelling like smoke.

Jessie

"There is no snooze button on a cat who wants breakfast."
OsnobunnieO is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Cat Forum : Cat Discussion Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome