Just get it over with and make it illegal.
Vedderlution_Baby
Posts: 2,535
http://www.wgal.com/news/10429399/detail.html
Man Fired For Smoking Sues Company
Worker Says He Wants Job Back
POSTED: 7:30 am EST November 30, 2006
Email This Story | Print This Story
Sign Up for Breaking News Alerts
BOSTON -- A Massachusetts lawn care worker who was fired for being a smoker is now firing back.
He's filing a first-of-its-kind lawsuit in Massachusetts.
The case is likely to be watched very closely, because the man was fired not for smoking on the job but for smoking off the job.
Scott Rodrigues, 30, was fired in the fall for failing a drug test administered by his employer, Scotts Lawn Service. The father of a 4-year-old boy, Rodriguez said he was astonished when he was told his employment was being terminated.
"I don't do anything. I don't drink, I don't do anything. And he goes, 'No, it was for nicotine,' and the room's spinning, basically, I'm going, what? I got tears welling up in my eyes. I go, 'You know, I love this job,'" Rodrigues recalled.
The lawn care company had adopted a new policy of not hiring workers who use tobacco products. The intent is to reduce employee health care costs. The legal question, however, revolves around whether it's discriminatory to fire someone for doing something on their own time that's legal, but against company policy.
"I go look, this isn't right. This is what I do at home. I never smoke in the vehicles. Never smoke in front of people. Never smoke in front of customers. I never smoke at the shop," Rodrigues said.
He said the company offers a smoking cessation program which he had planned to take part in. Now, he just wants his job back.
"Definitely like a chance to work and I really, I'd like for this thing to go away, but I don't want it to go away without everybody being protected," Rodrigues said.
The company said it's simply an economic issue, saying that it's a well-documented fact that smoking employees have more health problems.
This is pretty ridiculous to me. Why not just go ahead and make smoking illegal? It might as well be. People can even smoke on their own private property anymore.
Man Fired For Smoking Sues Company
Worker Says He Wants Job Back
POSTED: 7:30 am EST November 30, 2006
Email This Story | Print This Story
Sign Up for Breaking News Alerts
BOSTON -- A Massachusetts lawn care worker who was fired for being a smoker is now firing back.
He's filing a first-of-its-kind lawsuit in Massachusetts.
The case is likely to be watched very closely, because the man was fired not for smoking on the job but for smoking off the job.
Scott Rodrigues, 30, was fired in the fall for failing a drug test administered by his employer, Scotts Lawn Service. The father of a 4-year-old boy, Rodriguez said he was astonished when he was told his employment was being terminated.
"I don't do anything. I don't drink, I don't do anything. And he goes, 'No, it was for nicotine,' and the room's spinning, basically, I'm going, what? I got tears welling up in my eyes. I go, 'You know, I love this job,'" Rodrigues recalled.
The lawn care company had adopted a new policy of not hiring workers who use tobacco products. The intent is to reduce employee health care costs. The legal question, however, revolves around whether it's discriminatory to fire someone for doing something on their own time that's legal, but against company policy.
"I go look, this isn't right. This is what I do at home. I never smoke in the vehicles. Never smoke in front of people. Never smoke in front of customers. I never smoke at the shop," Rodrigues said.
He said the company offers a smoking cessation program which he had planned to take part in. Now, he just wants his job back.
"Definitely like a chance to work and I really, I'd like for this thing to go away, but I don't want it to go away without everybody being protected," Rodrigues said.
The company said it's simply an economic issue, saying that it's a well-documented fact that smoking employees have more health problems.
This is pretty ridiculous to me. Why not just go ahead and make smoking illegal? It might as well be. People can even smoke on their own private property anymore.
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
It was on collegehumor.com
I know smoking is bad for you, but it's not illegal and he wasn't doing it on the job. I think he has a good chance of winning this fight
Obesity is just as bad right, should employers be able to fire someone who's put on weight?
Please be joking.....I do not like smoking (although used to) but it is decision to do so and hell it is still legal the last time I checked....ridiculous...to fire him for smoking will set quite the precedant....
btw i am a non-smoker
Certainly.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
I can't stand health insurance. It is the biggest reason that healthcare costs are so high. It has no business being tied to employment.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
Ha Ha, that's pretty heartless man, ok how about a different scenario? What if on weekends I play hockey with friends, it's a dangerous game and I could seriously get hurt doing it, which could easily effect my health care, should I be fired for doing "dangerous" things in my off time?
Nope.
You mean a precendent that says a business should be free to choose its employees by its standards? God forbid.
Wrong. When the company has to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to take care of thier employees poor health habits whether they are at home or at work, the company should have a say. Hey if this guy really wants to smoke he should tell the company he will take his job minus any health care benefits. Let him pay for his disgusting habit, by paying for the insurance premiums out of his own pocket. I wonder how long it would take him to quit.
Ya know Mr. Maker, if I didn't know better, I'd say you weren't a smoker?
I didn't say anyone should be fired for any of these things. I said employers should be able to fire people for these things.
Let me ask you this: should you be able to quit your job for any reason?
Two packs a day. So smooth and so fresh.
Perhaps a middle-ground would be to offer a monthly allowance for healthcare, and if someone's medical coverage is high because they smoke, let the smoker pay the additional costs. The same will go for all others whose coverage is higher then normal.
Your right about that. It probably is the companies responsibility to make their anti-smoking policy known before canning someone.
The Scotts Company, an international lawn and garden products and services company based in Marysville, Ohio, wanted to create a high-performance company culture while strengthening its financial performance. Scotts has introduced a variety of wellness initiatives as part of its Project Excellence program to empower employees to take control over their lives, including offering healthier food in its cafeteria, and opening a $5 million fitness gym, complete with a health clinic staffed with a physician, nurse practitioners and diet and fitness experts.
Last year, Scotts decided to strongly encourage employees to stop smoking (on and off the job) in an attempt to control escalating health care costs and improve the health of its workers. Scotts provided counseling and smoking-cessation programs to employees. The company has about 5,300 employees in the U.S. and, in about 20 states where Scotts has jurisdiction, it is no longer hiring employees who smoke. Scotts is also evaluating a policy to release employees who continue to smoke.
Note: Studies show that healthy workers are not only more productive, but also less expensive. Employees who smoke cost the average company an extra $3,856/year, according to the National Business Group on Health.
http://www.insurancenewsnet.com/article.asp?a=top_lh&id=68199
Then the company has every right to fire this guy. Good for them.
Pass laws to restrict the rights of companies. Otherwise, companies will "pass" laws by proxy to restrict the rights of citizens.
My campaign is not to "rid the world of government". My campaign is to rid the world of unearned authority. So no, I would not support a world where corporations could force you to comply to anything for employment since such a world would prohibit entrepreneurship. However, a world where a business may determine the standards of conduct required for employment at their firm is very much a world I support, since that world also allows an employee to choose an employer based on their own standards as well. If I forbid a company from being able to choose me based on their standards, how could I expect a world wherein I was allowed to choose them based on my standards?
Furthermore, the "vote" is still very much in play here (government or no government). If those employed by this company do not like this policy, they are free to quit their jobs.
This man has every right to smoke. He has no right to smoke and continue to extract a paycheck, however, against the wishes of those who sign that paycheck.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!