Can't get a job if you are a smoker!!!

[orlampagal]

A few months ago, I went to a job fair. The county that is about 45 minutes from me had several openings in their courthouse. I have had 3 years experience with that specific work, and was super excited after having spoken with their HR person about a particular position that seemed was perfect for me. She gave me her direct line, and email and asked me to fill out the application and scan/email it to her. I did as I was told until I got to the last page. On the last page it asks "Have you smoked, or taken tobacco in any form in the last year?"

Well at that time I was still a smoker, so I called her up, and told her that yes I still smoked, but would definitely quit for the position. She said I had to be smoke free for a minimum of a year. I asked her how would she know if someone has smoked? They test for nicotine!!! can you believe that!!

So... while using an e-cig, I still would be banned from this work place, not to mention many others in this area. Most hospitals have gone smoke free and won't even let you smoke in the parking lot. Of course this doesn't apply to me because I vape, but still... can they discriminate like that? I asked her why they don't hire tobacco users and her answer was that the health insurance goes up too high because of their upper respiratory problems and that even if you quit, their insurance goes up. It seems ridiculous for me at any rate. What's your opinion?

 

[dumwaldo]

That does not sound legal to me.

 

[Vicks Vap-oh-Yeah]

Smokers aren't a "protected" class of people, so they can discriminate based on that.....stinks, but just another way for society to harass smokers.






There's a flying monkey in here?

 

[malyden]

I have recently heard of several places that test for nicotine even after you get the job. Personally I feel this is total discrimination!! Because it means even if you are trying to quite using nicotine replacement they still won't hire you!! Heck if they can't ask how old you are, what religion, etc they should not be able to discriminate against you because you choose a lifestyle that includes smoking or nicotine after all it's not like it's illegal!!!!

 

[Richie G]

That does not sound legal to me.

>

No it doesn't. But, once one answers the question that yes he/she smoked, they will find a pseudo reason not to hire.

As George Costanza said -- "You just lie. How hard is it to lie?"

 

[dumwaldo]

Smokers aren't a "protected" class of people, so they can discriminate based on that.....stinks, but just another way for society to harass smokers.

I am sorry but i still disagree. It does not sound legal to me.

I would contact the state board of labor and a labor lawyer just to inquire.

This is not like drug testing that tests for illegal drugs. It is testing for a substance that is completely legal to use and seems like an unfair bias to me. It seems no different than a prospective employer asking women to take a pregnancy test before hiring them and that is not legal.

DW

 

[dumwaldo]

>

No it doesn't. But, once one answers the question that yes he/she smoked, they will find a pseudo reason not to hire.

As George Costanza said -- "You just lie. How hard is it to lie?"

But if it is not legal to use that information it would also be illegal to ask the question.


EDIT
keep in mind this is CIVIL law not criminal law so it is only enforceable through a lawsuit.

 

[orlampagal]

Or maybe it is similar to asking a prospective employee if they take anti-virals or anything having to do with cholesterol or blood pressure?

I dunno, I thought of going to the state, and I asked an employment attorney about it, and what was said above is true, they ask the question, and warn you that you can't lie because they test for it. If you answer that you are a smoker, they find lots of reasons why you are not the best candidate.

 

[jim420]

Just tell them you are gay. Then they will HAVE to hire you. And that's somthing they can't test!

 

[OutWest]

some companies have been getting away with it. It's grasping at straws, but nicotine addiction may be covered by the ADA if youre recovering or recovered. http://www.philalegal.org/files/welfarehandbook/10/10c.pdf Course, at this stage youre actually still using.

My best guess is that it would depend on regulations in your state. In my state walmart went to a "no hiring of smokers" policy several years back. But, they later rescinded it. I dont know if they were forced to by the state or if they simply couldnt keep enough workers.

 

[CharlesMaples]

A few months ago, I went to a job fair. The county that is about 45 minutes from me had several openings in their courthouse. I have had 3 years experience with that specific work, and was super excited after having spoken with their HR person about a particular position that seemed was perfect for me. She gave me her direct line, and email and asked me to fill out the application and scan/email it to her. I did as I was told until I got to the last page. On the last page it asks "Have you smoked, or taken tobacco in any form in the last year?"

Well at that time I was still a smoker, so I called her up, and told her that yes I still smoked, but would definitely quit for the position. She said I had to be smoke free for a minimum of a year. I asked her how would she know if someone has smoked? They test for nicotine!!! can you believe that!!

So... while using an e-cig, I still would be banned from this work place, not to mention many others in this area. Most hospitals have gone smoke free and won't even let you smoke in the parking lot. Of course this doesn't apply to me because I vape, but still... can they discriminate like that? I asked her why they don't hire tobacco users and her answer was that the health insurance goes up too high because of their upper respiratory problems and that even if you quit, their insurance goes up. It seems ridiculous for me at any rate. What's your opinion?

Florida is a right to work state. So for other than the Legally protected classes (ie race sex ect ) the employer can choose to hire or not hire for any reason. Ie they can refuse to hire any one who is waring a blue shirt.

 

[dumwaldo]

Florida is a right to work state. So for other than the Legally protected classes (ie race sex ect ) the employer can choose to hire or not hire for any reason. Ie they can refuse to hire any one who is waring a blue shirt.

That is not what right to work means. Right to work has to do with union recognition and prevailing wages. It is not free reign to discriminate.

DW

 

[CharlesMaples]

That is not what right to work means. Right to work has to do with union recognition and prevailing wages. It is not free reign to discriminate.

DW

Florida law is a little broader than most. It is not illegal to discriminate It is only illegal to discriminate against protected classes (see at will employees)

 

[CoderGuy]

Here's a blog entry about hiring smokers. Obviously written by a non-smoker.

Does Refusing to Hire Smokers Amount to “Discrimination”? WhiteCoat’s Call Room

Personally, even if I was a non-smoker I would not work for a company that discriminated against anyone. If they switched to that policy, no matter what my financial situation, I would quit. Also, I would not want to work with co-workers that would allow that policy to remain in effect.

Randy

 

[TropicalBob]

This has been discussed before and this kind of "discrimination" has indeed been challenged and smokers LOST in a Miami courtroom. Eliminating smokers from a specific workplace is legal. The county north of mine will not hire anyone for any position who has smoked or used nicotine in the past year. It shows up as cotinine in urine tests.

You have cotinine? You don't have a job. Since it's a test for nicotine, not tobacco, an e-smoker will be unemployable, as well as the pack-a-day Marlboro dude.

 

[CoderGuy]

This has been discussed before and this kind of "discrimination" has indeed been challenged and smokers LOST in a Miami courtroom. Eliminating smokers from a specific workplace is legal. The county north of mine will not hire anyone for any position who has smoked or used nicotine in the past year. It shows up as cotinine in urine tests.

You have cotinine? You don't have a job. Since it's a test for nicotine, not tobacco, an e-smoker will be unemployable, as well as the pack-a-day Marlboro dude.

I know, it's irritating. Also the smoker trying to quit using NRT would be unemployable. So they want you to quit, but only in a way that is proven to be ineffective. Much like our e-cig fight; they want us to quit smoking, but want to ban the only method that would actually help us quit. Who said ignorance is bliss LOL

 

[surbitonPete]

They may just as well put us all up against a wall and shoot us if they refuse to employ us.

 

[harmony gardens]

The tabacco settlement money was supposed to help states defray the cost of health care for smokers, and the new tabacco tax is earmarked for healthcare,,, not for smokers, but for kids. Then they say that any safer alternatives appeal to kids, so they ban those,,,


what a viscious cycle,,,,

 

[nicowolf]

Right now, it seems employers are treating their employees - the ones they are always telling that they're looking out for them - as expendible. They are dictating to employees all kind of things, including which chemicals they can put in their bodies. The antismoking thing they are attributing to the health insurance cost, but will not waive it if the employee is willing to waive the health insurance. Why is the health insurance carrier more important to the employer than the employee? Why can't the employer tell the insurance carrier, "Nope, sorry, we are not going with any carrier that discriminates against nicotine addicts. That would not be fair to our employees."? Why is it ok, at all, for an employer to test for ANYTHING that is not illegal? They are not testing to see if I have had alcohol in the past year - and far more costly hazards occur from its abuse. They are not testing to see what my blood sugar has been in the past three months (and I know this one is possible) to see if I am a diabetic on self-destruct. Maybe I should stop now, before I give them b*st*rds any ideas. Why is the insurance carrier more important than the person who jumps through innumerable hoops every single day to remain their employee?

 

[nicowolf]

Just tell them you are gay. Then they will HAVE to hire you. And that's somthing they can't test!

I really wish it were that easy. I could be CEO somewhere since the middle aged males in those positions are completely unwilling to say that, and I could actually pass that test.