Fired for smoking? Constitutional?

[Thorgasm]

The Constitution limits what the government can do, not private business. Private business can do anything it wants to inside statutory law.

Invading privacy is against statuatory law.

 

[Kandahar]

Big brother is big brother no matter what uniform he wears, whether it be governmental or corporate.

That's not true. If your employer is invading your privacy, all you have to do is quit your job and find another one. You don't have any recourse when the government invades your privacy, other than leaving the nation (and even that's not always an option).

They have no right to invade privacy, that is what this is about, not about contract law. Would you think it is ok for a NBC employee to be fired because he happened to watch CBS news?

It would be legal, yes. Whether it's "ok" or not is irrelevant.

 

[Kandahar]

My personal belief is yes. It is a waste of money. But that is for another thread. The difference is that the employee is breaking the law. I don't think it has anything to do with infringing on an employee's right to privacy.

If it's just a matter of the employee breaking the law, why do employers only test for drugs? Why don't they routinely test employees, through a lie detector or whatever, to see if they've committed any other crimes? The fact that drugs are illegal is the least of the employer's concerns when faced with a drug-addicted employee.

Mandating that an employee can't use drugs is no different than mandating that an employee can't smoke, and both are perfectly legal.

 

[Thorgasm]

That's not true. If your employer is invading your privacy, all you have to do is quit your job and find another one. You don't have any recourse when the government invades your privacy, other than leaving the nation (and even that's not always an option).



It would be legal, yes. Whether it's "ok" or not is irrelevant.

How is invading privacy legal?

 

[Thorgasm]

If it's just a matter of the employee breaking the law, why do employers only test for drugs? Why don't they routinely test employees, through a lie detector or whatever, to see if they've committed any other crimes? The fact that drugs are illegal is the least of the employer's concerns when faced with a drug-addicted employee.

Mandating that an employee can't use drugs is no different than mandating that an employee can't smoke, and both are perfectly legal.

Some employers do use lie detectors. And just because someone fails a drug test doesn't mean that they are addicted.

 

[Engimo]

How is invading privacy legal?

If it is part of the terms of your employment, it is. When you join a company, you sign a contract that sets out what you must do to remain within their employ. If your employer requires you to wear a monkey suit every day, or submit to background checks, or not smoke, there's not a damned thing you can do about it besides quitting. There is nothing illegal about having contracts like that.

Your right to privacy is only protected from the federal government, not from employers whom you agree to work for under certain conditions.

 

[Kandahar]

How is invading privacy legal?

Because as long as you're aware that your employment is conditional on it, you're consenting to the invasion of privacy by continuing to work for that employer. If the employer was tapping your phones without your knowledge or consent, that would be a different matter.

 

[tryreading]

My personal belief is yes. It is a waste of money. But that is for another thread. The difference is that the employee is breaking the law. I don't think it has anything to do with infringing on an employee's right to privacy.

An employer can legally read an employees private emails. That's a pretty big invasion of privacy, even if you did write the email at work. Maybe you send an email while at lunch, on your own time. They can read it.

I work for a division of a company based in Central Florida. They will fire you if you are arrested, even if on your time. They check all backgrounds periodically. They scan monster.com, and other sites where people post resumes. If you have your resume posted on one of these sites, you will be fired. You cannot fraternize with other employees, or you may be fired. Also, smokers are fired when discovered. These are all legal.

The division where I work does not apply these rules.

 

[tryreading]

You have done no such thing, it is only now become an issue, and as such, must be handled in a court of law, and made right.

I have posted federal guidelines, and ADA material plainly showing that smokers are not a protected group regarding hiring. This information is on this thread. I guess you didn't read it.

 

[Vandeervecken]

Invading privacy is against statuatory law.

i invite you to share any statute in the nation that includes smoking under the protected acts of privacy.

Smoking effects others, through the smoke, fires, and accidents it causes, to the health problems that effect those you work with. Thus it really is not a private act now is it?

 

[Thorgasm]

i invite you to share any statute in the nation that includes smoking under the protected acts of privacy.

Smoking effects others, through the smoke, fires, and accidents it causes, to the health problems that effect those you work with. Thus it really is not a private act now is it?

What I do in my house is private.

 

[Engimo]

What I do in my house is private.

It sure is, but that does not mean that it is illegal for a company that you willingly work for to demand that you not do it. For example, a company can stipulate in its contract that you cannot badmouth the company or disclose certain information - is this a violation of your 1st Amendment rights? No, of course not. Privacy laws and the Bill of Rights only apply to the government, nothing is stopping private companies from making contracts with their workers that require them to do certain things.

 

[Vandeervecken]

What I do in my house is private.

Do you have children being exposed to the smoke? Under the law in many states now that would make it public.