Support NeoGAF

[TheLastCandle]

Smoker hate in this thread is ridiculous. Bunch of babies.

I'm all for banning smoking with certain jobs, but prohibiting that when at home is extreme.

Pretty much my thoughts. I don't smoke, but I always found the amount of bile spewed by a lot of non-smokers to be pretty absurd.

 

[Air Zombie Meat]

I wish I could blow smoke at you all over the internet.

 

[Scrow]

They should also stop hiring fat people, seeing as how that increases the cost of the employee in a variety of direct and indirect ways.

agreed

 

[toxicgonzo]

For. Smokers smell gross even if they are unaware of it.

Quoted for truth.

 

[JayDubya]

This, this is definitely too far. I'm all for pretty progressive laws about where people can smoke since it can impact others, but this is crazy. Where would that stop?

I"m all against "progressive laws" that dictate where people smoke, for the same reason I don't see any problem with this.
Like you, I don't own a hospital, so I don't have any role in setting its smoking policy or hiring policy.

Do I neccessarily think it's a good policy? Well, no, not really. I don't see the point.

 

[Nerevar]

I love the responses in this thread. If you're a free-market libertopian against this then you're just a hypocrite. Health care is the fastest growing cost for virtually every employer in this country, and companies are doing everything they can to contain it. I'm guessing "no fat employees" is next.


This is why I love the fact that I'm not some stupid, naive, libertopian ideologue. The fact that private companies have to butt into your personal life to make decisions that affect their bottom line is absurd. If we had a national healthcare system like every other developed country this wouldn't be an issue; it would be a matter of public policy (like it should be).

 

[jakncoke]

Smoker hate in this thread is ridiculous. Bunch of babies.

I'm all for banning smoking with certain jobs, but prohibiting that when at home is extreme.



Calming feeling. Relaxation.

Super addictive and expensive though so don't get into it.

It's neogaf what you expect?

 

[Misterinenja]

Yeah fuck individual rights.

 

[Like the hat?]

I'm as anti-smoking as can be, but I think this is stupid. If it's legal, there's no reason to not hire them.

However what really needs to be cut down on is those workers that take like 6 or 7 (or more) smoke breaks in an 8 hour work day.

My last job, people would take like six 15, 20 minute smoke breaks every day, plus their half hour lunch break. It's bs. Then again that was management's fault for letting it happen. Then again a few of the people that did that WERE the managers, so of course they weren't going to stop it.

 

[Hari Seldon]

I love the responses in this thread. If you're a free-market libertopian against this then you're just a hypocrite. Health care is the fastest growing cost for virtually every employer in this country, and companies are doing everything they can to contain it. I'm guessing "no fat employees" is next.

Likewise, if you are a card carrying Liberal and you are for this you are a hypocrite. Why should corporations dictate what you do on your own time?

 

[ameratsu]

I can see the logic behind banning smoking for employees in a health-care setting, as is discussed here. However, trying to police what they do when not at work through urine testing is going too far.

 

[ultron87]

Can't really get behind restricting people from doing an entirely legal activity when not on the clock.

 

[ahoyhoy]

does...not...compute....

sarcasmmeter.gif

 

[andycapps]

Likewise, if you are a card carrying Liberal and you are for this you are a hypocrite. Why should corporations dictate what you do on your own time?

Edit: Nevermind.

 

[Hari Seldon]

edit: nvm

 

[sangreal]

I think Employers need to reign in their practices of prying into the lives of employees. However, I'm not convinced that the solution is to bar them from doing so. What needs to change is public perception so that good employees do not want to work for these companies.

I can see the logic behind banning smoking for employees in a health-care setting, as is discussed here. However, trying to police what they do when not at work through urine testing is going too far.

How is it any different than being discriminated based on what they find your background check, credit report, drug test, facebook, etc. ?

 

[Like the hat?]

companies should be allowed to ban people from smoking while on the clock/on work property, but not keep them from doing what they want at home.

At most businesses, I can't go to work and crack a beer (although I would love to sometimes) but I can drink all I want at home. Should be the same with smoking.

 

[xbhaskarx]

Smokers should be put in reeducation camps.

 

[ahoyhoy]

Edit: Nevermind.

Next up: Employees must take oaths to use condoms during all future instances of sexual intercourse in order to prevent potential VD-related sick days from occuring

Employees must also submit requests for activites they perform on their vacation days so that HR can see if they pose a signficant risk to potentially resulting in more sick days in the future (i.e. Rock climbing, Para sailing etc.)

Oh, and for anti-smoking GAF: employees who exist beyond the "Smell-o-meter threshold" must submit their daily diets to HR for analysis to determine the proper course of action to ensure that your fucking BO does not interfere with everyone else's enjoyment of work.

 

[Nerevar]

Likewise, if you are a card carrying Liberal and you are for this you are a hypocrite. Why should corporations dictate what you do on your own time?

Of course they shouldn't. But our conservative, tea-party fueled stupidity binge of the last decade or two has ceded all government authority to private entities anyway. Decisions like this are the natural outcome of the "free market" acting on corporate entities to dictate their hiring policies. We've moved into a world where discrimination on any factor is not only legal but ethical as long as there's a financial reason to back it up.

For example, why should your credit score impact whether you get hired or not? Does the fact that every employer these days use it as a contributing factor in their hiring decision upset you?

 

[J-Rod]

I think people have conditioned themselves to get mad when they smell someone who has been smoking rather than the odor itself being so bad it actually affects their ability to do something. I think it is more rooted in frusteration that someone is doing something they don't want them to do because they find it so irritatingly unfashionable. The daily odor of popcorn or onions at lunchtime carry farther and lingre longer than the guy in his cube after a cigarette. And outdoors, I worry more about the constant odor of oil based materials either from road work, cars, or gasoline killing me than some guy smoking. People who step out of a gas station stink to me, like the smell of someone who has been working in a fast food kitchen, but it is just one of countless other offensive sights, sounds, and odors that are part of everyday life outside your house. It sucks having to smell the cocktail of ten different people's shits and coffee piss everytime I go to the restroom at work, but such is life. Quit being such a delicate flower, it no worse than people who smell like patchouli.

 

[Meadows]

Smokers are very unproductive, always going outside every hour, or complaining that they want to smoke. So annoying.

 

[SmokyDave]

Good idea. Also, no fat people, you stink. Muslims allowed but no prayer breaks are permissible. Nobody that drinks enough to get hung over and nobody that risks their health outside of work with such fripperies as 'exercise' or 'sports'. Also, no male employees, men are sex offenders.

 

[Vanillalite]

How is it any different than being discriminated against based on what they find your background check, credit report, drug test, facebook, etc. ?

To be fair a lot of people have issue with them checking through most of that shit outside of the routine background check as well.

Granted I'm not saying it bugs me or not, but there definitely is a contingent of people that hate that employers check any of this shit other than say if your a serial killer or something.

 

[dogmaan]

Yeah!

They should get rid of Asthmatics as well those lazy fuckers.

And people who drink white wine with Pizza, fuck them.

Spoiler

fucking ridiculous, I could understand if smoking was illegal...but?

 

[Get'sMad]

This is dumb.

I wouldn't care if you didn't allow people to smoke cigs while on the job, but who gives a fuck what they do outside of work. Just fuck them with their health insurance and give them incentives to quit smoking.

 

[ultron87]

This part is especially egregious:

Many companies add their own wrinkle to the smoking ban. Some even prohibit nicotine patches. Some companies test urine for traces of nicotine, while others operate on the honor system.

While most of the companies applied their rules only to new employees, a few eventually mandated that existing employees must quit smoking or lose their jobs. There is also disagreement over whether to fire employees who are caught smoking after they are hired. The Truman Medical Centers, here in Kansas City, for example, will investigate accusations of tobacco use by employees. In one recent case a new employee returned from a lunch break smelling of smoke and, when confronted by his supervisor, admitted that he had been smoking, said Marcos DeLeon, head of human resources for the hospital. The employee was fired.

So I can't even use a patch to try and quit smoking.

And if I go to a restaurant where people are smoking for lunch I get interrogated.

 

[Air Zombie Meat]

companies should be allowed to ban people from smoking while on the clock/on work property, but not keep them from doing what they want at home.

At most businesses, I can't go to work and crack a beer (although I would love to sometimes) but I can drink all I want at home. Should be the same with smoking.

Thats how I feel about it too. I know a few people that only smoke at the weekends when they go out drinking, seems ridiculous to me that they wouldn't be hired just because of that.

 

[Hari Seldon]

How is it any different than being discriminated against based on what they find your background check, credit report, drug test, facebook, etc. ?

Well there are people (like me) who think that discriminating based on credit report should be illegal also, except in very specific situations like banker or security clearance jobs. How is someone supposed to improve their credit if they can't get a job?

Drug test and background check is looking for illegal activity which I have no problem with.

The facebook thing is pretty dubious for most jobs, but it is more along the lines of just assessing your personality by the public information that you volunteer freely.

Piss testing for a legal substance is an invasion of privacy. What if they start piss testing for anti-depressants? Depressed people suck at work.


It is amazing that gaf which is normally so liberal is right wing as hell on this.

 

[sangreal]

I think people have conditioned themselves to get mad when they smell someone who has been smoking rather than the odor itself being so bad it actually affects their ability to do something. I think it is more rooted in frusteration that someone is doing something they don't want them to do because they find it so irritatingly unfashionable. The daily odor of popcorn or onions at lunchtime carry farther and lingre longer than the guy in his cube after a cigarette. And outdoors, I worry more about the constant odor of oil based materials either from road work, cars, or gasoline killing me than some guy smoking. People who step out of a gas station stink to me, like the smell of someone who has been working in a fast food kitchen, but it is just one of countless other offensive sights, sounds, and odors that are part of everyday life outside your house. It sucks having to smell the cocktail of ten different people's shits and coffee piss everytime I go to the restroom at work, but such is life. Quit being such a delicate flower, it no worse than people who smell like patchouli.

I've got no problem with people who smoke. That said, as a non-smoker, I think you are crazy to suggest we are simply conditioned to have some sort of pavlovian response to the smell of smoke. It smells like shit and it lingers.

 

[Ivan A Nguyen]

Smoking can be harmful to other people, so I can understand this edict. The same can not be said for other habits. The urine test does seem to go too far. Like many things, smoking is harmful in excess. If a man had a cigar with a friend over the weekend, it should not be grounds for termination on Monday.

 

[sangreal]

Well there are people (like me) who think that discriminating based on credit report should be illegal also, except in very specific situations like banker or security clearance jobs. How is someone supposed to improve their credit if they can't get a job?

Drug test and background check is looking for illegal activity which I have no problem with.

The facebook thing is pretty dubious for most jobs, but it is more along the lines of just assessing your personality by the public information that you volunteer freely.

Piss testing for a legal substance is an invasion of privacy. What if they start piss testing for anti-depressants? Depressed people suck at work.


It is amazing that gaf which is normally so liberal is right wing as hell on this.

I don't think I'm right-wing on it. I just think it is ridiculous to make smoking the line when employers are intruding more and more into our personal lives in many other more invasive ways. I would support a ban on all of those practices and only let Employers judge you based on your performance. However, like I said, I'm not entirely convinced that is the best solution.

 

[Zzoram]

“There is nothing unique about smoking,” said Lewis Maltby, president of the Workrights Institute, who has lobbied vigorously against the practice. “The number of things that we all do privately that have negative impact on our health is endless. If it’s not smoking, it’s beer. If it’s not beer, it’s cheeseburgers. And what about your sex life?”

Acutally there is. Smoke directly affects everyone around you, someone eating a burger doesn't shoot trans fat into my blood but smokers get their smoke into my blood because I can't avoid breathing it in.

 

[ultron87]

Acutally there is. Smoke directly affects everyone around you, someone eating a burger doesn't shoot trans fat into my blood but smokers get their smoke into my blood because I can't avoid breathing it in.

One of your co-workers smoking after they go home from work does this?

 

[thefro]

This goes above and beyond and into the realms of discrimination. The arrangement is thus: don't smoke at work. If the inability to smoke affects their ability to work, whatever, fire them. But don't preemptively assume it will. That's bullcrap.

It raises health care costs for everyone which effects a business's ability to do stuff.

 

[shintoki]

I feel many ways about this.

One, it mentioned hospitals. I can completely understand them wanting to avoid smokers. But I really don't think any sort of job should have the right to discriminate against that if you can perform the functional duties. It would be no different than fat people getting banned, old people, or anything which they dictate as "Poor".

Now to be fair, I'd be for this if they just had a straight up ban at work places for smoking.

 

[J-Rod]

I've got no problem with people who smoke. That said, as a non-smoker, I think you are crazy to suggest we are simply conditioned to have some sort of pavlovian response to the smell of smoke. It smells like shit and it lingers.

Maybe we have a shortage of smokers and a surplus of other kinds of stinky folks where I work, because of all the offensive smells I take in each day, stale cigarettes are the mildest and least. The guy who sprays his cheap ass axe spray after going to gym, the lady who smells of patchouli all the time, the lady next over who can't cook popcorn without burning it, the musky guy who bathes once every 3 days, the guy who smells of a grocery store spice rack, and so, so many other things. I just honestly don't understand how it could be so offensive it actually affects your work. I have sat next to a smoker in my cube and you can certainly smell it, especially right when they get back, but after they sit still for a minute or two, I don't detect it anymore.

 

[Ryuukan]

The beginning of this article talks about hospitals and medical businesses. Most smokers have no idea how sensitive people with severe asthma can be around people with smoke seeped into their clothing. Even if they aren't smoking on the job, but smoking all night at home.

Spoiler

Yes, it stinks and can cause asthma attacks in people

 

[andycapps]

Well there are people (like me) who think that discriminating based on credit report should be illegal also, except in very specific situations like banker or security clearance jobs. How is someone supposed to improve their credit if they can't get a job?

Drug test and background check is looking for illegal activity which I have no problem with.

The facebook thing is pretty dubious for most jobs, but it is more along the lines of just assessing your personality by the public information that you volunteer freely.

Piss testing for a legal substance is an invasion of privacy. What if they start piss testing for anti-depressants? Depressed people suck at work.


It is amazing that gaf which is normally so liberal is right wing as hell on this.

Smokers are almost universally disliked where I work by the non-smokers. We don't get to take the 5-6 additional breaks that they take every day, otherwise our bosses would be asking where we go all the time. If someone smokes, everyone just assumes they're taking their normal smoke breaks. I don't dislike smokers personally, but I think they should be held to the same break standards as everyone else at the company.

 

[sangreal]

Smoking can be harmful to other people, so I can understand this edict. The same can not be said for other habits. The urine test does seem to go too far. Like many things, smoking is harmful in excess. If a man had a cigar with a friend over the weekend, it should not be grounds for termination on Monday.

We're not talking about smoking around other people. If you think the urine test is too far for tobacco, are you also equally up in arms about it with regards to marijuana testing? If not, why? Because smoking a joint with a friend over the weekend is illegal? Has anyone ever gone through a weekend without doing something illegal? If it was a cuban cigar do you think it should be grounds for termination? I just don't understand the selective outrage. Where were you guys when Employers were coming after everyone else's personal lives.

 

[Hari Seldon]

Acutally there is. Smoke directly affects everyone around you, someone eating a burger doesn't shoot trans fat into my blood but smokers get their smoke into my blood because I can't avoid breathing it in.

But that is not the argument they are making. They are banning smoking at home. Smoking in the workplace has long been banned.

Also, they are not banning smoking, they are banning nicotine. Nicotine can be had in many ways that does not involve smoking or any tobacco at all, like patches, gum, and e-cigs.

 

[Rapstah]

One of your co-workers smoking after they go home from work does this?

Do breaks and lunch count as work hours in the US? Because where I've worked there have been smoking employees hanging around the property smoking all the time, excusing themselves by being on break.

 

[Zzoram]

Yeah fuck individual rights.

What about the rights of non smokers to not breathe poison?

 

[Pinzer]

Acutally there is. Smoke directly affects everyone around you, someone eating a burger doesn't shoot trans fat into my blood but smokers get their smoke into my blood because I can't avoid breathing it in.

Yea but smoking is already banned from public places. You are not even breathing in second hand smoke in the workplace, it's just the smell. And really one breath of second hand smoke every once in a while is not going to give you cancer.

 

[BobJustBob]

it's a hygene issue. Smokers smell like shit. I had to sit next to one in my cubicle and it sucked every time she came back from one of her 11 smoking breaks. If she was not showering or had B.O. we could have actually had HR talk to her and say something, but because she smokes everyone else has to just grin and bear it.

Smokers smell like heaven. I haven't smoked in ten years and it's a joy when the two smokers in the office come back from their smoke break. I get all conflicted having those kinds of feelings about two dudes.

 

[Zzoram]

it's a hygene issue. Smokers smell like shit. I had to sit next to one in my cubicle and it sucked every time she came back from one of her 11 smoking breaks. If she was not showering or had B.O. we could have actually had HR talk to her and say something, but because she smokes everyone else has to just grin and bear it.

Smokers really do smell like shit. I almost had to vomit sitting next to someone who just finished smoking on the bus for an hour. The nausea was killing me, it's ridiculous that people think they have the "right" to make other people sick.

 

[Zzoram]

companies should be allowed to ban people from smoking while on the clock/on work property, but not keep them from doing what they want at home.

At most businesses, I can't go to work and crack a beer (although I would love to sometimes) but I can drink all I want at home. Should be the same with smoking.

How many smokers do you know that don't smoke during an 8 hour workday?

 

[ultron87]

Do breaks and lunch count as work hours in the US? Because where I've worked there have been smoking employees hanging around the property smoking all the time, excusing themselves by being on break.

Well the crux of this article is not hiring people/firing people because they smoke off work hours.

I have no real problem with banning smoke breaks as that would have the theoretical direct effect of increasing the amount of time someone is actually working during the day.

But if someone wants to smoke during lunch off company property or after the work day is done I can't think up an argument that makes sense. It really just boils down to discriminating against an unpopular legal activity.

 

[blame space]

I smoke like 1 cigarette a day I should just quit.

 

[erpg]

Heck yes, please do this, Canada. Sick of their stank. Worst is when you inherit a smoker's desk chair. Foul.