Snuffed Out: Smokers Need Not Apply

reply to post by MarlboroRedCowgirl


Will you still be touting the virtues of smoking when your teeth are stained yellow and you have wrinkles all over?

Call us when your lungs are ready to fall out.

reply to post by chiponbothshoulders


That doesn't apply in this case. I'm talking about personal habits in the workplace, not pollution in general.

No one's calling for a ban on smoking in general.

My argument is that companies are not responsible for supporting the bad habits of their workers.

I thought the right-wingers on here would cheer such an idea as a company refusing to hire smokers? Isn't that the "free market" at work? /sarcasm

FYI: If anyone is curious why I'm so anti-smoking, I grew up in a household with a mother that insisted on smoking in the house. I do not smoke and I have asthma now and I must use a rescue inhaler and I also use symbicort. My brother has stupidly gone back to smoking, requiring an inhaler as well. My mother has to use a breathing device and she absolutely refuses to stop smoking, despite years of promising to do so.

When you've been around stuff like that for your whole life, it tends to get to the core of your being. It's a downright selfish habit that robs people of their dignity and robs their family members as well, much like alcoholism. It won't kill you now but give it enough time and you'll be dead.

Reply to post by The Sword

I smoked two cigs while reading this thread.

The ignorance and selfishness in just this thread alone is quite sad.




Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

reply to post by Lemon.Fresh


Yes, the ignorance and selfishness of SMOKERS is what bugs me.

Like I said, call me when your lungs are ready to fall out so I can say "I told you so".

Reply to post by The Sword

Really now? You have to twist my words?.

Thanks for proving my point.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

reply to post by The Sword

I worked at a place with a woman who would take cigarette breaks every 10-15 minutes. She's still working at that company but it got to a point where she wasn't getting things done and I had to pitch in.

Well then they need to fire her for failing to do her job. They do not need to fire the guy that smokes on his lunch break. It makes no sense to punish everybody because of one extreme example.

Of course this is America, land of the free unless it annoys me.

What all is going on in the US today, has a greater impact than many would like to think or admit too. Face it, we the people are being played. Oh it is more than just smoking is bad for you, and well lets take down a sucessful cooperation cause they choose to make fast food that is causing people to be overweight. It goes deeper than that, it is an arrogent and vain government that is trying to tell people we know what is good for you, and will force you to do it. You see the fact that most governments and people who think about these things, know is that you can not regulate personal choice and behavior. They know from days gone by, that every time they try, it fails. Last time such was done on a national scale, it caused an increase in crime, that was Prohibition. Oh at first, it seemed like a good idea, decrease the alcohol consumption, keep people on the straight and narrow, help them out, improve society, but when reality set in, the people rebelled against it and organized crime flourished. So it was repealed and things just calmed down.
Now you look at the new bad substance, smoking, well there have been years of messages that state smoking it bad for you, don't do it, well the rates dropped some, but not all of the way, not good enough, so they raised the taxes on such, and still it is not good enough, well now how about businesses that out right refuse to hire people who do such. This will only accomplish one thing, more unemployment and a group that we will end up having to support. The latter is just a solid push.
Most people have to realize, that what all we do, choose to do, consume and how we live is all a matter of personal choice. Yes, those who oppose smoking will say such is addictive, but fail to realize, that it is a personal choice, and those who want to do such, will do such.
Tobacco companies do not force a person to try their product, the clown does not stand on the corner and twists a persons arm to make them eat a hamburger, nor do liquior companies put a funnel into a persons mouth and make them consume their products. Automobile companies do not force a person to get into a car and drive. It is all personal choice. A person has to choose to consume fast food, drive a car, drink that beer, or even light up a cigarette.
Now for my own point of view on smoking at the workplace: As I have worked at a company that did not allow such to happen and knew the rules, most of the time the rules are very clear cut, an employee can use such, but normally it is in a designated area, and only when it will not impact the running of the business. And I enforced that rule, even if it ticked off the employee, and when they complained I pulled out my copy of the employee handbook, (I had taken the time to highlight the spots that I knew most would complain about) Hand it to the employee and made them read it. It ended all arguments right then and there, as it was clearly in black, white and covered in a yellow highlight. And most of the time, it was they went 2 hours without taking a smoke break, got a 10 minute break, 2 more hours, a 30 minute lunch, and then 2 hours for another 10 minute break, and finally 2 hours later they could go home, ending their shift.

reply to post by The Sword


Sword, I am sorry that your family has had so many problems with cigarettes. I do not see how your bad experience should mean my rights are limited.

If you don't want to smoke, don't. If you don't want to eat in a restaraunt that allows smoking, don't. If you don't want to be around smokers, don't. You can make the choice not to be around smokers. Your preference should not be forced on everyone as the only right action.

What if I said nobody should be able to put salt on their food because my granps and my wife both have medical problems caused by sodium in take? What if I said that sugar should be outlawed because my aunt had severe diabetes that eventually took her life? That would seem extreme and absurd wouldn't it?

I don't see why corporations should be able to fire a person for smoking. Especially when they can not fire somebody for alcohol or drug abuse that effects their job, if they admit it and ask for help. I don't see why anyone believes it acceptable for the government to pass laws that tell private business owners it is illegal for them to allow smoking in their establishment.

A little tyranny is okay if it removes the little anoyances I guess.

Sorry, double posted.

reply to post by Pajjikor



7 cent per pack tax? Just where do you buy them at?

Tax by state

reply to post by angeldoll


Soon enough bosses will be confronting employees, shaking that warm urine sample in your face "Hey Joe, your urine looks kinda cloudy.. you been having FUN on the weekends?... if we detect any fun in your urine.. you're fired!"

I would sue them for the mental anguish & suffering I endured having to quit, if they're going to dictate what I can do in my off time.. they're going to get sued for any inconvenience I incur adhering to their policies.

They're not making it harder for unemployed people to get work.

Unemployed people shouldn't be spending money on cigarettes anyway. It's an unnecessary expense that can be easily cut out.

The hospital are making a concious decision to hire healthy people. Non smokers are an easy and a cheap one to fix first.

As a healthcare provider, they should be hiring folks who have a vested interest in people's health. Smokers do NOT have that interest at heart.

It's the same for any employer hiring for a position - employers will hire people who have natural tendencies towards the job at hand. Smokers do not have other people's health at mind, so they are not the best fit to work in the health industry.

Please excuse me if someone has already said this but my theory is that businesses don't want to hire smokers because the insurance costs go up if the person smokes. Now that we have all this healthcare reform and a crappy economy employers are looking for every way to cut costs that they can find.

I would say it's a direct result of health care costs to employers.

reply to post by Shadowflux


Does that mean that employers should ban employees from sky diving, SCCA racing, horse riding, or piloting airplanes on their off time? Can they start limiting the number of sex partners a person has?

When do we draw the line on letting employers regulate the lives of their employees off the clock?

This type of spiteful behaviour is very common place here in the UK.
I can't wait for any one of the medical profession who smoke ( and there are still quite a lot ), to refuse treatment to a nonsmoker.
I would.

Up here in Canada they are not directly discriminating the person for smoking, but they are enforcing a bylaw that requires you to smoke in certain areas away from non smoking people.

Some of the working areas are so large, that in order to legally smoke you must walk for several minutes away from doorways and major foot traffic areas.

Personally, I dont want to breathe in your tar filled exhalations and I think the majority of smokers who mindlessly toss their filthy butts onto our clean streets and forest trails don't give a damn about the impact it has.

I'm not angry at smokers, I feel compassion for the hopelessly addicted masses who give billions of dollars to a corporation that is knowingly killing them and trying to hide the fact through marketing, all the while making their general area unclean with the stench of death and filth of tar.

I'm a construction contractor, and I can tell you smoking in and around a building damages it profoundly to the point where it is destructive and in some instances beyond cleaning.

You dont have the right to hurt me through your actions
and now you dont have the right to blow poison gas in my face (as easily)

But still, the option should still be made available for smokers to have a dedicated area, otherwise we are living in a fascist nation.

reply to post by babybunnies

Unemployed people shouldn't be spending money on cigarettes anyway.

Yeah, heaven forbid the indulge in a perfectly legal way to relax and relieve stress. I mean who do these people think they are.

As a healthcare provider, they should be hiring folks who have a vested interest in people's health. Smokers do NOT have that interest at heart.

You do know what a non sequitur is right? It means that one thing does not follow the other. Just because a person smokes does not mean they have a disregard for the health of others. I guess the doctor that delivered me in the early 80's had no regard for the health of people. I guess the medical students I see smoking, on the street, in front of the hospital don't care about people's health.

A person can make a personal decision about what they ingest and their health without it reflecting on their regard for other people's health. If I decide I want a cigarette it is nobody's business but mine. As long as I make an effort to keep it away from others.

Smokers do not have other people's health at mind, so they are not the best fit to work in the health industry.

I'm glad they didn't think this in the 1980's when the doctor's were putting my dad's back together with steel rods. His back doctor smoked, but he was also one of the most highly regarded surgeons in his field. I'm glad they didn't fire the doctor that saved my grand pa's life after his first heart attack. I remember him standing outside the hospital door smoking a Marlboro Red 100 as he told my aunt's and uncles about the surgery.

If that is disregard for the health of other's I must not understand the definition.

Why is it that people think they have the right to tell me how I need to live my life. I am a fully grown and informed adult. If I decide I want to partake in a legal activity I should be able to do so. If you disagree with my decision feel free to say so, but do not feel you have the right to dictate how I live my life.

Why do so many people feel they have the right to force others to live life the way they want?

reply to post by babybunnies


You are dehumanizing people who smoke, get a grip.

Addiction is a horrific thing for someone to go through, they are worthy of compassion.

The problem is the anti smoking laws have been birthed prematurely and without love for those who may still need their smokes for their sanity. We are a nation who has been smoking for hundreds of years and we can't expect everyone to quit overnight.

But we can expect them to respect us as non smokers until the day they die or manage to quit.

Heres a thought for some humor, destroy the company who sells the smokes instead of hating the people

Then sell the seeds for tobacco and people who take the time to grow it, chop it, dry it and roll it for the sheer enjoyment of tobacco (Like me) can enjoy this as much as they like.

but really, thats fascist to...let the people smoke.

Just respect me and the common area while you do it.

There are many companies who will not hire smokers...try and fly for an airlines if you smoke...

But there are many who also want a person to pass their physical too, and don't want employees to have a poor credit score etc.

If any of you think this is going too far just think how much health insurance costs a company and the cost of non-productivity from unhealthy workers….