Fired for smoking? Constitutional?

[Deegan]

You're the one dealing in emotional rhetoric with no sound basis for your argument. You want everyone to think this is fascism for chrissakes. And you can stop calling me miss, thank you.

O.k slut, I have made many legal arguments, none of which you have chosen to debate, is that any better?

 

[mixedmedia]

This thread has gotten so exciting, I need a Marlboro to calm down.

I just gotta new pack of Winstons, let's go take a smoke break.

 

[Deegan]

Then you might as well discard the bums, alcoholics and domesticly abusive people out there. How would that leave society standing?

I hope to help them as well, not just throw them out with the dirty bath water, this trend will do that very thing, IMHO!:shock:

 

[tryreading]

You monitor her smoking habit, how on earth do you do your own job? :shock:

Who said I do my job?

Actually, whenever I go visit my friend at work, this girl is always outside smoking. Almost every time I go there. It shouldn't be allowed.

 

[@_girL........]

All of the companies in Florida that I know of offer at least two breaks per day, plus lunch, and none of them are union.

If you look back you'll see I was using the CDC for data only.

You know what? A friend of mine owns a sizeable company that transfers rental cars from one area to another. He has over two hundred employees. I am going to call him tonight and ask him to fire at least one smoker for me, preferably two or three, if he can spare them. I wish he would start with his secretary, Mayra, who constantly walks outside to smoke. I'll call him after the Redskins game. I can't wait!

Ha!! I live in FL and 2 out of the 4 jobs I have had in the past didnt give me breaks, i.e. Dunkin Donuts. They are franchised but the owner didnt like giving his employees any breaks. Try standing on your feat from 6 in the morning to 4 in the afternoon. Another company I had to literaly fight for my lunch break was K-Mart (East Oakland Pk.). The GM on the shift threatened to fire me if I didnt stay on the register. It was the customers who complained and spoke out against him, not like it really mattered in the end. At that job, I was scheduled from 9 to 5. Wheres the justice in that?

 

[tryreading]

O.k slut, I have made many legal arguments, none of which you have chosen to debate, is that any better?

I was beginning to wonder about you, whether you had a sense of humor. Finally you say something funny. Took you 126 posts, though.

 

[mixedmedia]

Ha!! I live in FL and 2 out of the 4 jobs I have had in the past didnt give me breaks, i.e. Dunkin Donuts. They are franchised but the owner didnt like giving his employees any breaks. Try standing on your feat from 6 in the morning to 4 in the afternoon. Another company I had to literaly fight for my lunch break was K-Mart (East Oakland Pk.). The GM on the shift threatened to fire me if I didnt stay on the register. It was the customers who complained and spoke out against him, not like it really mattered in the end. At that job, I was scheduled from 9 to 5. Wheres the justice in that?

Well, they were breaking the law.

 

[@_girL........]

Well, they were breaking the law.

Yeah, but its not like there was anyone to change that. I bet its still that way, except for K-Mart. They got a new Store Manager there.

 

[tryreading]

Ha!! I live in FL and 2 out of the 4 jobs I have had in the past didnt give me breaks, i.e. Dunkin Donuts. They are franchised but the owner didnt like giving his employees any breaks. Try standing on your feat from 6 in the morning to 4 in the afternoon. Another company I had to literaly fight for my lunch break was K-Mart (East Oakland Pk.). The GM on the shift threatened to fire me if I didnt stay on the register. It was the customers who complained and spoke out against him, not like it really mattered in the end. At that job, I was scheduled from 9 to 5. Wheres the justice in that?

You should have taken up smoking. With all the breaks involved in that, you would have felt like you weren't even working.

 

[mixedmedia]

O.k slut, I have made many legal arguments, none of which you have chosen to debate, is that any better?

What legal arguments? That a company shouldn't be able to write their own policy? You have been all over the map on this thread making wild claims and associative conjecture without really considering anyone else's viewpoint. But I'm supposed to debate you? :roll:

 

[@_girL........]

You should have taken up smoking. With all the breaks involved in that, you would have felt like you weren't even working.

Smoking breaks werent even allowed, people were fired for it.

 

[tryreading]

I just gotta new pack of Winstons, let's go take a smoke break.

Okay, but don't tell my boss.

 

[Deegan]

What legal arguments? That a company shouldn't be able to write their own policy? You have been all over the map on this thread making wild claims and associative conjecture without really considering anyone else's viewpoint. But I'm supposed to debate you? :roll:

Hey, don't be angry miss, just read the thread, somehow I assume you just popped in mid argument, that is your problem, certainly not mine.

 

[Deegan]

I was beginning to wonder about you, whether you had a sense of humor. Finally you say something funny. Took you 126 posts, though.

I was hoping that was clear, thanks for appreciating my humor.

 

[Busta]

Hay Deegan, it's a perfectly legal and moral practice to fire or deni employment to smokers......

I can't seem to play the video, but here's my experience:

I used to work for Pete Lien & Sons inc.
In addition to being physically sound, with a doctor signing off on my hearing, sight, lung capacity, drug test, range-of-motion, etc., one *condition of employment* (= perfectly constitutional) that I had to agree too was that I was not a smoker, and that I would not start smoking, even just one cigarette, for the duration of my employment.

Falsifying my answer or violating this policy at anytime during my employment would have resulted in immediate termination.

In addition to raising the company's portion of my insurance premiums, smoking was banned due to the following job related hazards/working conditions:
1. Resporators. Smoking reduced or eliminated one's ability to use a resporator, which was a daily must on some jobs (mine included).
2. Fine dust. The apnosphere within the prosessing plants contained fine dust. A smoker's pre-existing diminished lunge capacity would only be exacerbated by this fine dust. Also, this fine dust would greatly increase the risk of infections in the lung for smokers.
3. Hand pumped Gasoline and Diesel. Each Operator was required to fill their own flue tanks for their Front Loader/Forklift/Truck, etc. Nedless to say, fire + gas fumes = bad day.

I remember some fringe reasons as well, like people wanting to take extra brakes, cigarette butts falling into Haydite block mixtures, etc.

ps. Most quarries that produce Haydite will let you buy some in small, privet quantities.....like a 5 gal. bucket full......and Haydite is great for guardens.

 

[Thorgasm]

This is an invasion of privacy issue. How can a company tell me what to do on my own time? Can they fire you for other risky behavior? Insurance companies are controlling our corporations, our government, and our lives. This coming from the industry that is the sceond biggest scam next to bottled water.

 

[Deegan]

This is an invasion of privacy issue. How can a company tell me what to do on my own time? Can they fire you for other risky behavior? Insurance companies are controlling our corporations, our government, and our lives. This coming from the industry that is the sceond biggest scam next to bottled water.

Exactly, some here have obviously never seen the movie "Philadelphia" where a man was fired because he had AIDS, but being a smoker is somehow different. Are all gays now to be determined as a health risk? No, this slippery slope is clear, and I can not for the life of me, see how so many "liberals" see it differently!

 

[mixedmedia]

Exactly, some here have obviously never seen the movie "Philadelphia" where a man was fired because he had AIDS, but being a smoker is somehow different. Are all gays now to be determined as a health risk? No, this slippery slope is clear, and I can not for the life of me, see how so many "liberals" see it differently!

I think you should address Busta's post and make your claims valid in the light of perhaps this being sound policy for some industries.

 

[tryreading]

I was hoping that was clear, thanks for appreciating my humor.

Didn't say I appreciated it...

 

[Deegan]

Didn't say I appreciated it...

Well screw you then!

 

[Deegan]

I think you should address Busta's post and make your claims valid in the light of perhaps this being sound policy for some industries.

No thank you miss, as a lawyer, I would not limit myself to "Busta's" post, but thanks anyway.

 

[tryreading]

Exactly, some here have obviously never seen the movie "Philadelphia" where a man was fired because he had AIDS, but being a smoker is somehow different. Are all gays now to be determined as a health risk? No, this slippery slope is clear, and I can not for the life of me, see how so many "liberals" see it differently!

AIDS is a clinical illness, which makes it illegal to discriminate against someone who has it in most cases. It is protected, smoking is not.

 

[Thorgasm]

AIDS is a clinical illness, which makes it illegal to discriminate against someone who has it in most cases. It is protected, smoking is not.

Addiction is an illness recognized by the AMA.

 

[Deegan]

Addiction is an illness recognized by the AMA.

Burned sir, just admit it, he burned you good, can you do that?

 

[Thorgasm]

Burned sir, just admit it, he burned you good, can you do that?

He was responding to you, lol, you admit you were burned.