County to ban hiring smokers

[TropicalBob]

Add another to a growing list. And it's really a no-nicotine policy. We e-smokers will test positive in saliva or urine tests for cotinine, a byproduct of nicotine consumption and the easiest way to test for smoking. We could not e-smoke and be employed in this county. This is a HUGE problem for those switching from real tobacco, and its known health hazards, to safer e-smoking.

From The Miami Herald:

If you smoke or use tobacco, don't bother applying for a job with Escambia County government.

Starting Oct. 1, the county will have a tobacco-free hiring policy. All applicants for county jobs are currently required to take a drug test, which will be expanded to include testing for tobacco use. Any applicant testing positive for tobacco will not be eligible.

It's one of several policies county commissioners approved Thursday aimed at improving the health of employees and to get the county's health insurance costs under control, said John Weber, a human resources supervisor for the county who specializes in employee benefits.

The county also is enacting a 50-foot smoking ban from the entrance or exit of any county building on Oct. 1. In two years, no county employee will be allowed to smoke anywhere on county property.

Keith Reinke, 50, of Pensacola, is a smoker who owns his own concrete polishing business. He's not sure what to think about the new tobacco-free hiring policy.

''I guess it's their option to do that; it is getting to be a matter of affordability. [Health costs] are so expensive you can't hardly blame them,'' Reinke said. ``But what's next? You can't have a beer. Alcohol is bad for you, too. It's starting to walk a fine line. Smokers are an easy target.''

 

[sanneke]

I would not even want to work there.

They want control over you.

What is it their business what I do in my free time?

Ridiculas.

 

[Nazareth]

Bob thaese kinds of discriminatuions are just goign ot keep on happening time and time again as the rabid anti-smokers see how far they can push us smokers- The ONLY thing we smokers can do- but won't do unfortunately' is launch a massive protest and strike against any business that condones discrimination agaisnt smokers. The ONLY thing htese creeps will respond to is being hurt financially for hte discriminatory actions.

This o****ry was built on the backs and sweat of smokers, and htese creeps who now reap the benifits of those hwo preceeded us and buoilt htese businesses would not even have their jobs if smokers didn't build the businesses for htem to work at- But sadly, we as a country are becoming less concious and appreciative of htose hwo fought and worked to make htis countrty what it is today!

 

[Lady Python]

I would not even want to work there.

They want control over you.

What is it their business what I do in my free time?

Ridiculas.

We (F2C) said long ago that smoking bans were the thin edge of a very thick wedge.

We're beginning to see the first rumblings towards prohibition of alcohol in the UK as well at the moment - something the smoking lobby have been warning about for years.

They said they'd never ban smoking. They did.

No doubt, we'll be hearing a couple of years down the line "They won't ban alcohol". They will despite the fact that everyone knows prohibition doesn't work. You only have to look to the Roaring 20's to see that.

Sanneke. You summed it up 110%. They want control over every aspect of our lives and people really need to wake up and say enough is enough and start fighting back.

 

[Lady Python]

Worth also remembering that the brave soldiers, airmen and sailors who fought in two world wars were nearly all smokers.

They would turn in their graves if they could see what is happening at the present day

 

[20ADAY]

.

We're beginning to see the first rumblings towards prohibition of alcohol in the UK as well at the moment - something the smoking lobby have been warning about for years.

.

In what way ?

 

[TropicalBob]

A discussion of that would take this badly off-topic. Open a thread in community for that.

 

[Nazareth]

Worth also remembering that the brave soldiers, airmen and sailors who fought in two world wars were nearly all smokers.

They would turn in their graves if they could see what is happening at the present day

Can you imagien self-righteous, rabid anti-smokers banning servicemen and women fro msmoking? Especially right before goign into battle? Egads! I challenge any anti-smokerto go after the military- we'll seewhat kind of reception these anti-smoking pukes receive then!

 

[Lady Python]

In what way ?

With this:

A ban on happy hours and cut-price promotions

Pubs and clubs ordered to serve smaller measures of wines & spirits as standard

Cigarette-style health warnings on cans and bottles, extending a voluntary scheme where containers show the units of alcohol

Loss leading alcohol sales by supermarkets may also be targeted.

Drinks promotions and happy hours have been regulated by individual pub companies since 2005. But ministers believe there has been widespread abuse of a voluntary code.

Only a matter of time before alcohol ads are taken off TV and breweries are no longer allowed to sponsor sport.

Think it won't happen 20ADay?

We thought that once about cigarettes. It'll never happen we said but it did.

We are also seeing people sacked or turned down for jobs because they smoke here in the UK too, although at present it hasn't happened too often - yet (keeping the subject on topic TB).

Nazareth. I'm with you all the way

 

[20ADAY]

LadyPython, thanks, wasnt aware of all that... Wont pull this thread OT, sorry Bob.

 

[TropicalBob]

It's a fascinating topic. And I see the same thing Lady Python sees. Not Prohibition. Too many politicians and "important people" socially drink. But public drinking will get hit by the anti-all-things-bad-for-you movement. Start a thread if you like.

Right now, we have our hands full trying to legitimize and legalize e-smoking. It won't be a walk in the park.

 

[TheEmperorOfIceCream]

Who wants to walk in the park anymore? No booze allowed. And don't even think of (e)smoking your filth near the swings, or the duck pond.

Think of the children!

 

[Lady Python]

No TB, it won't be a walk in the park but there has to come a point when people world-wide wake up and start standing up the the health fascists.

As I see it, the biggest problem we have, especially in the UK and no doubt in America too is that from the time we are in the cradle we are spoon-fed "Doctor knows best". How many people really challenge that?

I have seen so much bad things from the medical profession (ignoring the smoking ban lies for the moment) over the past 20 odd years.

My ex-husband's mother was a lovely lady but crippled by rheumatoid arthritis. She was put on a drug (I can't remember what it was called now) and 18 months later she was dead at 56 years old She was my mother-in-law but a wonderful one. I loved her and still miss her. A couple of months after she died (brain haemorrage) that drug was pulled off the market for causing haemorrages and sudden cardiac arrests. Too late for her though

My son has been in and out of hospital over the past 6 years and relies on being hooked up to a machine 3 times a week to stay alive.

In that time there have been four serious errors made, one which was life-threatening and it was only thanks to the fact that I was well trained in First Aid (I was an Assistant Centre Officer and First Aider with the Red Cross for a number of years) that I noticed my son was bleeding profusely from the operation sites (yes, plural). Some idiot had given my son Heparin (an anticoagulant) instead of Hepsal (a saline solution). If I had not spotted this my son would probably have died or at best been left brain-damaged. A few years later I found out that at the same hospital, same ward the same thing happened to a girl. Despite my complaining at the time nothing was done about that member of staff who obviously should not have been in that profession.

The other serious error happened less than two years ago and resulted in my son being mutilated. One hospital said he had appendicitis, the other said he did not. He was shuttled back and forth between our local hospital (who had it right but does not have the expertise to treat renal patients), home and the renal hospital some 40 miles away, a round trip of nearly 100 miles. Twice he was transferred from one hospital to another. He was put on Morphine both times because of the excrutiating pain he was in.

Then there was my husband. Four and a half years ago he had a major heart attack. In a nutshell, he nearly died. The local hospital nearly finished him off by giving him GTN. Some people have a bad reaction to it and he was one of them. In their arrogance they suggested my husband was a nutcase A more down-to-earth, sensible and level-headed man you could not meet. Eventually, after I let it be known that I trained as an Auxiliary Nurse in one of the largest teaching hospitals in Europe, the charge nurse got a doctor and the situation was resolved. She did explain that many people have a bad reaction to GTN but there are other drugs which do the same job so there is plenty of choice. Problem solved.

Four months later, they nearly killed my husband by giving him a diabetic drug that should never be given to heart attack patients. After that, my husband took all the medication and flushed it down the toilet. He has never been near a doctor since and nor have I.

Why did all this happen? Simply because many doctors think they are God Almighty. They seem to think that lay-people know nothing. If they had their way, many of them would make sure lay-people would know nothing. One doctor when my husband was in hospital said if he had his way all information (to the general public) would be taken off the internet.

That is sheer arrogance and dangerous with it.

Thankfully there are some good doctors - like Dr Loi.

There are many who do a lot of good. It's a shame that many of them have forgotten their Hippocratic Oath and that is why we are in the situation we are now. Part of the Hippocratic Oath states...and do no harm.

When doctors refuse to treat people because they are smokers, obese or whatever else, then they are doing harm.

The vendetta against smokers (and probably eventually those using e-cigs) will continue until people get so fed up with being bullied, harrassed and persecuted that they finally wake up and tell the scientists, medical profession, the likes of ASH and that mish-mash of an organisation WHO plus the various governments and quangos to go forth and multiply!

 

[TropicalBob]

Those are terrible stories, Lady Python. I'd be upset too. You are correct that there are many good doctors, but there are others who don't even listen to patients, sleepwalk through their practice and retire with a Mercedes-Benz and a fat offshore bank account. For our cause, we want the ones who care about patient health. Fact is, their smoking patients will likely be much healthier if they become e-smokers. Many smokers need to hear a doctor tell them that. Tell them it is NOT quit-or-die. There are healthier alternatives available. (That said, we have no PROOF of anything about e-smoking! We need it and we need it now.)

Part of the job of e-smoking's promoters is to sell this practice to the medical profession. Dr. Loi is a great prophet -- in his corner of the world. In the U.S., I mostly hear resellers chasing the sound a cash register makes. This is not about health. It's about greed. Who besides Ruyan is funding essential clinical research on e-smoking? Who? I know where my loyalty will reside. Not only do they make the best products, but they know what must be done if this is to be accepted.

A few lonely voices speak of choices beyond Big Tobacco and Big Pharma. They can barely be heard in the $500-million noise made by Michael Bloomberg and Bill Gates kicking off an international "stop smoking" campaign.

 

[Lady Python]

And sooner or later people get fed up with being told what to do and will rebel. It's started already. Here in the UK people are telling the government EXACTLY what they think of them by voting against them. Nu Labour are losing seat after seat, even their safe seats are falling like ninepins.

One of the MPs was on a radio interview the day after the local elections. The interviewer read an e-mail sent in by one of Nu Labour's activists in the North East of England. He said that one of the main reasons why people had voted against Nu Labour was the smoking ban.

We saw the same thing repeated last Thursday in Glasgow East. The smoking ban was only part of it but Labour had held Glasgow East for 90 years. They kicked them out of office in spectacular style. Glasgow East is a poor area and they are sick of having no jobs, ever increasing prices, increasing crime where gangs rule the streets and the police are powerless to stop them and if they do catch the criminals the Courts let them off because the government tells them not to imprison these thugs, higher and higher taxes and their few pleasures, having a beer and a cigarette taken from them and an occasional night playing bingo as many of the bingo halls have closed down thanks to the smoking ban.

If we did not have the idiotic government we have, the likes of ASH, CRUK etc. would not have forced through a smoking ban. There may have been some restrictions but not a blanket ban like we've got at the present moment.

However, and I'll take a bet on this, I think that the smoking ban will be relaxed in part shortly (concessions made perhaps in the form of separate smoking rooms) and right after it a general election will be announced. Sprat to catch the mackerel.

 

[TropicalBob]

Lady Python, I think you are in full denial about smoking. It is not coming back. You talk about "the people." A clear majority in your country and mine do not smoke. That doesn't necessarily mean they hate smokers, but they don't smoke and they would rather the rest of society didn't either. Smoking is a nuisance by every measure. Second-hand smoke. Butts littering streets. Bad breath. Stinky clothes every non-smoker can smell. Burns and fires. More disease. Lives ending prematurely. It's all there. It's clear. It is not disputable. Rebel all you want. Smoking is not going to make a rebound.

In democracies, generally, the majority rules. That's what we have here. Smokers and pro-smoking groups are a small minority in the U.S., a group uttterly without clout or influence. Increasingly, they are the least attractive members of society. Just look around. The movers and shakers either don't smoke at all -- and love to say how easy it was to quit the nasty habit -- or they have moved to cigars, enjoying a nice boom now as cig sales spiral down.

Focus your passion and energy on getting e-smoking approved when it comes under government consideration. Our practice needs your intelligence so it doesn't get a quick ban-brushoff as being just another kind of cigarette smoking.

 

[Lady Python]

Well, an awful lot of people are in denial then!

The majority of people, both smokers and non-smokers in this country did not want a blanket ban.

Our government spouted that they had done a public consultation (?) and the overwhelming majority wanted a ban. So who were the "public"? It wasn't me or anyone I know. The general public was never asked.

The government did their "public consultation" with members of ASH, CRUK and the medical profession. Hardly a public consultation. The result is pubs are closing across the UK at a rate of 20 a week - and that's only pubs. Cafes and restaurants are closing down at a similar rate. I've never been one for going to pubs as I don't particularly care for alcohol, but I do like going for a coffee when I go shopping. On a Saturday you would be hard pressed to find a table in any cafe. Now, you can count the people in them on one hand. My favourite cafe which served the most delicious home made food and served lovely coffee closed down one month after the smoking ban came in. It was quite a large cafe, being on two levels. You always had to wait for a table which you didn't mind because it was so good. After the ban people stopped going and the owners sold it.

I used to enjoy a game of bingo once in a blue moon. I haven't been since just before the smoking ban - and nor have many people I know. We had two bingo halls here. One right in the town centre, the other out of town and difficult to get to especially for elderly people. The one in the town centre closed down 6 months ago due to falling trade which they blamed entirely on the smoking ban.

When our government got elected, a PARTIAL smoking ban was part of their manifesto. That was to include places which served food, cafes, restaurants and pubs that serve food. The government, without consultation renaged on their election manifesto and slapped a blanket ban on everywhere. On top of that, to add insult to injury, in every shop, workplace and even in public toilets by law signs measuring approx 9" x 6" with a big red circle with cig in the middle crossed by a diagonal line, with the lettering NO SMOKING BY LAW has to be displayed. Everywhere. The stupid thing about it is, for the past 25 or so years there has been no smoking in shops anyway. I wouldn't dream of going into a shop and smoking and nor would anyone (except for the drunkest drunk occasionally). It's just not the done thing.

In this country, it's not just the smoking ban that's the issue. For example under the guise of "Health and Safety" and mainly perpetrated by this idiotic government, even kiddies playparks don't escape. When I was a youngster we had the usual swings and chutes. The chutes were quite high but they were great fun. Then along came Health & Safety and the nanny brigade and said chutes can't be more than 5ft off the ground. Ours were 10ft plus. OK, there was the occasional accident but you just got up, dusted yourself down and climbed up and slid down again. We all survived and we had great fun. Todays youngsters, a lot of them would jump out of their own skins

At the moment there is way too much "ban this, ban that" going on here. Alcohol is the next target as I said in another post, along with "tackling obesity". We've become a nation of namby-pambys, told what to do, when to do it and how to do it by a nanny-state government that will stop at nothing to get their own way and that has got to stop.

Thankfully, more and more people are waking up to the real agenda and this government's time is numbered. For many people, it can't come quick enough.

The movers and shakers either don't smoke at all -- and love to say how easy it was to quit the nasty habit

And these are the worst kind. These are the people who become rabid anti-smokers (whether that's cigarettes, cigars, pipes or what have you). They seem to adopt a "holier than thou" attitude - forgetting of course, that they too were once smokers.

On the subject of e-cigs. What I think might happen is that e-cigs will become popular. Nothing will be said by nanny-government until that happens, then they will think to themselves "Hmm. A great way to increase tax" and slap heavy taxes on it. That is the way this Labour government operates. If it's popular - tax it to death. However, I should think by the time that happens this government will be out on it's neck.

Just for the record, another thing that's worrying people immensely here at the moment is the price of fuel. On top of having to pay £1.30 for a litre of diesel ($2.5 = $10 a gallon), the price of gas is going up by a whacking 70%8-o with electricity not far behind. Of course, people's wages are not going up to correspond. We have a limited income. We're struggling now - and it's summer (we're having a bit of a thunderstorm at the moment as I write this - love thunderstorms) so I don't know how we're going to cope with the forthcoming increases On top of that the price of basic foodstuffs is through the roof. The UK is not a good place to live for more reasons than one at the moment

BTW Tropical Bob, I'm enjoying this debate

 

[TheEmperorOfIceCream]

My church has an 'it is against the law to smoke on these premises' sign. Some wag (ahem) has written 'we frown on devil worship, too.' on it...

 

[Lady Python]

My church has an 'it is against the law to smoke on these premises' sign. Some wag (ahem) has written 'we frown on devil worship, too.' on it...

It's totally crazy that even churches have to display these ludicrous signs.

Hey! Wonder what the government would do if smokers claimed "Sanctuary"?

I bet that would stuff nanny-government. Now there's an idea

 

[TropicalBob]

Lady Python: Me, too. And we share love of thunderstorms. Where I live is called the "thunderstorm capital of the USA". They're daily now and I sit on my porch and watch lightning dance. Freaks out my dog, but ...

I will always consider myself a smoker. I'm just not smoking today. But I'm a smoker. I dislike being told what to do, although I understand a general job of government is to protect the safety and health of citizens. That's where all the bans come from. They are protecting the public's safety and health. Debatable, perhaps, but that's the logic.

When I look back on my smoking years, I'm stunned at what I got away with. No matter the year, a majority of people around me did not smoke. I did. I didn't hesitate to light up. It was just ... understood that some people smoked.

Government didn't lead our U.S. revolution against cigarette smoking. Government, in fact, initially protected Big Tobacco, who were big campaign contributors. It was citizen groups that forced change, inch by inch. Government reponded slowly at first. The 1964 Surgeon General's report detailed smoking woes, but caused little real change. Then people got fed up one by one. Restrictions became more common. Then came a kind of community-thought change. Instead of tolerating my irritating habit, people began saying:

What right do you have to pollute public air just because you want to?

In pretty quick succession, the public places I once smoked in became "No Smoking" places. Looking back at smoking and the mess we all caused for non-smokers, I know we will never return to those days. The bans will get more restrictive. The steps will be to force smokers off with ever higher prices, every year. Fewer places to smoke. Less acceptance by non-smokers. Finally, smokers will say, "What am I to do?"

And at that point, we hope they learn of e-smoking. We hope it becomes legal, with regulated and safe products to offer from mass marketers. We hope addicted smokers don't fall for quit-or-die. There are alternatives that do not pollute the public air and do not harm the former cigarette smokers. We must be guides to those alternatives.

On your other points: Economy sucks. Here, too. Present government sucks. Big time where I live. Changing the government will change the course of tobacco use. Too much to even hope for. The reality is that as nicotine addicts have moved from nasal snuff to cigars and pipes, then to cigarettes, they must now evolve to the next device -- the e-cigarette.