Seems that there are reports out that smokers are deliberately being excluded from hire and even being fired because they smoke.Now, is this ok?the employer has to pay health care out of his pocket ans statistically smokers tend to be less productive and call in sick more often.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/1524684.stm

So is it not a right of the employer since its him paying to be discriminatory toward smokers?



What about current employees being fired because they smoke?

We practice discrimination everyday. Is it not ok for an employer to say no to a smoker especially knowing that the smoker will cause his and your health insurance costs up? If you, as the employer, are going to be responsible for the cost of your employee's health care then you should be allowed to select employees, and get rid of employees based on any aspects of their lifestyle that would be unhealthy and, therefore, would cost you money.

If a company that delivered discriminated against bad drivers because they would cost them money is ok{it happens all the time} then why cant an employer do the same against those that will cost him money both in health care and productivity?

Some say smokers are not as bright as non smokers;
http://capetimes.co.za/index.php?fSe...icleId=2338591

So what do ya think. Is this ok or not?

__________________
"...quemadmodum gladius neminem occidit, occidentis telum est." [...a sword never kills anybody; it's a tool in the killer's hand.]
(from Lucius Annaeus Seneca, "the Younger," circa 4 BC-65 AD

And they should be able to hire/fire anyone they want.

__________________
Proudly a "South Park Republican"

Agreed, the employer can do whatever the hell they want.

__________________
"Violence isn't always evil. What's evil is the infatuation with violence."
Jim Morrison

I agree. And this is only step one. The second step will be when employers stop hiring and start firing people who are overweight.

__________________
"George W. Bush surrounds himself with smart people the way a hole surrounds itself with a donut." —Dennis Miller

What about my diabetic employee? Should I be able to fire her even though she does her job? She is high risk, you know. Employers should be able to hire anyone or not for any reason. If they want a nonsmoker, they should advertise for one the way you would for a roommate. If we are gonna start firing people for unhealthy lifestyles, I'm afraid smoking is just the tip of the iceberg. This is a little too "big brother" for me.

__________________
Order without liberty and liberty without order are equally destructive. - Theodore Roosevelt

Point is good but there is one large difference between a diabetic and a smoker.
A diabetic cant change being one. W e don't have that tech yet. It can be suppressed by moder medicine but the medical ramifications are still there.
Smokers choose to be smokers. The addiction aside they mad the choice where ass the diabetic did not. They can choose to stop all be it hard where as the diabetic cant choose to stop being a diabetic.

At my work the weight problem is so obvious as to be disgusting. I never knew the human body could expand so far without bursting.
Weight can for the most part be a choice as well .there are few exceptions.
Its apples and oranges.

__________________
"...quemadmodum gladius neminem occidit, occidentis telum est." [...a sword never kills anybody; it's a tool in the killer's hand.]
(from Lucius Annaeus Seneca, "the Younger," circa 4 BC-65 AD

Sedy,
I understand what you mean. But my point was not about choosing or causing high risk behavior. High insurance costs was the excuse/reason for the policy. What if the company did cholesterol testing?

I don't believe that the real reason was high insurance costs. They could have easily passed the higher rates on to the employees.

And, I wouldn't dream of firing my diabetic employee. I would have a very hard time finding someone as competent and trustworthy to replace her.

__________________
Order without liberty and liberty without order are equally destructive. - Theodore Roosevelt

But people are already screaming about the cost number 1.

second, only if they passed it on to the ones causing the increase by their own choice.

Same should go for cholesteral testing IMHO.
I guess I am just nit picky

__________________
"...quemadmodum gladius neminem occidit, occidentis telum est." [...a sword never kills anybody; it's a tool in the killer's hand.]
(from Lucius Annaeus Seneca, "the Younger," circa 4 BC-65 AD

That's what I meant.

__________________
Order without liberty and liberty without order are equally destructive. - Theodore Roosevelt

oky doky

__________________
"...quemadmodum gladius neminem occidit, occidentis telum est." [...a sword never kills anybody; it's a tool in the killer's hand.]
(from Lucius Annaeus Seneca, "the Younger," circa 4 BC-65 AD