Fired Smoker Sues Ex-Employer

[prometheus]

Its been slow in the Bloog forum so I figured I would provide a little food for thought to wake everyone up.

"Scott Rodrigues, 30, says he was fired from a lawn-care job he had for several weeks at The Scotts Co. after a drug test came up positive for nicotine. He said he wasn't told he would be tested for the substance and was told the company would help him quit."

I didn't even know this was possible! I have been drug tested many times for many jobs and always wanted to refuse because I really do believe it is an invasion of my privacy when an employer wants to know what in in my urine but this is just nuts. I am done with the whole thing. Next drug test I have to take for a job I am telling them forget it. No job is worth losing your freedom! I also heard they are now allowed to fire people based on weight too!

What does everyone think of this? Would you submit to a drug test when you can be fired for having a legal substance in your urine? I'm opening a store and no one that eats dairy is allowed to work there HAHAHA!!! Its all just so stupid!

Here is a link to the article
Fired Smoker Sues Ex-Employer - CBS News

P.S. I just quit caffeine today so I have been posting a number of rants... forgive me

 

[judybr]

Well I hope that fellow wins. I think they really just wanted rid of him so they could hire a friend, lol. Seriously though, it's a shame when you can't do something legal on your own time. How long will it be before eating meat will get you fired? Where is the stopping point?

 

[leaford]

So the facts are that the employer had a policy of not hiring tobacco users, which the employee admits he knew about, but claims that he did not know the employer was going to be testing for nicotine. The employee claims that he expected the company to give him help quitting, and that he tested positive because he had been chewing Nicorette gum.

As debatable as anti-tobacco policies are legally and morally, the courts at this point tend to accept them. The issue here, to me, is that the employer based the firing on a test that only proves nicotine use, not tobacco use, and the policy the employer justified the firing with was against tobacco use, not nicotine use.

 

[redempti0N]

King refused to comment specifically on Rodrigues' case because he said the company's lawyers hadn't reviewed it, but said all new employees are told they must be tobacco-free and are told they will be tested for nicotine

Correct me if I am wrong but isn't tobacco and nicotine 2 separate things?

 

[tonyorion]

As a retired CEO of a company that manufactured production machinery, the pressure to reduce costs was always high-so was the pressure to reduce the risk of litigation. We were part of a multi-national conglomerate, and the policy of hiring only non smokers was put into place well after I was hired. The policy was not to force smokers to quit, although the policy was quite generous in getting people to attend smoking cessation clinics.

Smokers drive up insurance costs. A cancer case can easily cost over a $1,000,000 in medical expenses. So what is fair? Should a company be forced to bear the extra costs of insuring a high cancer risk individual?

As far as drug testing in general, I have no sympathy for its opponents. Do I want someone under the influence operating heavy machinery and causing an accident with the consequence of personal injury to other innocent bystanders and company property (as has happened)? Do I want a service tech high on Vicodin on a repair call with a company car getting into an accident with some serious bodily injury and property damage? This person was found out to be addicted through his insurance claims for the same prescription issued by different doctors. This was 10 years ago. We will sooner or later move to a national data base of psychopharma drugs where excesses can be spotted; this is already a fact of life with the large national chains like Sam's Club, Walgreen's, Rite Aid, etc.

There is no such thing as freedom without responsibility

 

[rbuck9]

smokers drive up insurance cost ?
while i agree cancer costs a lot of money, thats why we pay insurance premiums.
nicotine in a persons system does not mean cancer,smoking or not
whats next ? insurance company says a dna marker means this person may get
diabetes dont hire him.
this type of behavior is a very slippery slope and should be stopped

 

[prometheus]

There is no such thing as freedom without responsibility

True but what about when enforcement of responsibility takes away freedom? Such as this!?

Just remember that these same laws are the ones companies like Hooters hide behind to fire women for being over weight... last one I heard about is here:

Leanne Convery Suing Hooters, Claims She Was Fired over Weight

5'8" waitress who weighs 132 pounds COME ON!!

I also found an article that says they want to expand this to obesity and have for several companies stating that they wish to promote a healthy lifestyle for there employees and lower insurance costs. I can't seem to find the article now... but I will keep looking.

Point is as long as what we are doing is legal how is it an employers right to dictate how we live or our lifestyles?

*EDIT*

This clip have me in tears LMAO. Love the Young Turks


And yet another that has to do with smoking and weight:

http://businessshrink.biz/psycholog...d-for-smoking-obesity-and-blood-test-results/

WOW totally nuts these days

 

[RippleInStillWater]

The Harvard MBA with the maximization of profit over the concern for the workers has done more to ruin this country more than any foreign competition. This is just another rationalization by corporations IMO; rbuck is right, it won't stop because of attitudes like tonyorion (no offense!) who seems to endorse not allowing people to have their own life away from their place of employment.

 

[Pamdane]

I was a safety trainer for a trucking company a few years ago. We did random drug tests. I agree whole heartedly with random drug tests. Lying to get a job is crazy. You KNOW right from wrong. Do you want to be treated by a Doctor high on a Rx med? Do you really want the big rig in the lane next to you drunk from last nights celebration? Do you want your airplane pilot flying high? If the chance of being randomly selected for a drug test is what it takes to keep my family safe, then I say your talking Freedom vs License. Your right to freedom stops when it meets my need to be safe.
In the USA we have the right to bear arms, that doesnt give us the freedom to shoot each other. And yes, I own guns. They are locked up. Away from my children. It is my responsibility to provide a SAFE atmosphere in my home. There is freedom, and there is abuse.
As for insurance, shop around and find out what it costs to insure yourself. The employer pays the greater portion of the employees insurance, and therefore he has the right to dictate the terms under which a person is employed. If a person wants a job so badly, compromise and tell the employer you smoke and will buy your own insurance. I know companies that allow this. But you wont get much of a paycheck to spend when your paying big $$ to insure yourself....
The answer is here. If you agree to a job that states you must be a non-smoker or anything else for that matter- dont lie to get the job. If your a trucker on your 10 hour down time, dont drink. Its a job requirement. The employer is able to state his terms. If you dont like it, dont take the job if it conflicts with your personal life, so be it. Make a choice, but dont blame the employer when they catch you lying.

PS. Drug tests can now show more than just nicotine in urine, they can show the other chemicals in cigarettes. So they do know the difference. Whether they choose to lump nicotine use into smoking category is another matter.

 

[RippleInStillWater]

You didn't answer the last two questions posed, no offense, but prometheus and I weren't referring to on-the-job usage -- when does the company end and our private life begin?

 

[prometheus]

You didn't answer the last two questions posed, no offense, but prometheus and I weren't referring to on-the-job usage -- when does the company end and our private life begin?

lol yeah he totally missed the topic of the thread.

 

[leaford]

And I'm just bothered by the little technicality that they fired him for violating an anti-tobacco policy, but all the test proves is nicotine use, not tobacco use.

 

[Audio Weasel]

Indeed, how much salsa, or how many baked potatoes would I have to eat to hit a positive on a nicotine test?

Hoenstly, I had no idea I was so lucky. I vape openly at my desk, and the Director of Operations for the office likes it, since I don't go out for smoke breaks.

 

[Beans]

Kind of off topic but not. I just got life insurance and the company supports e cig use. They do a mouth swab test that can tell the difference between tobacco use and non tobacco nicotine use. I don't understand why other companies can't or won't make that distinction. And I agree 100% that anything LEGAL someone does on their own time is their own business!

 

[prometheus]

And I'm just bothered by the little technicality that they fired him for violating an anti-tobacco policy, but all the test proves is nicotine use, not tobacco use.

Too true but its been demonized too much for them to not freak out! That's like accusing someone of murder because they have a gun in the house! lol

All they can test for is by-products in your urine. Same with other stuff example weed... you can fail that with certain cold medicines and everyone has heard about the poppy seed case causing what they call a false positive. It was no false positive! They tested positive because the compound was present. That doesn't mean that were doing opium though...

They could test for carbon monoxide but that would just prove he inhaled smoke. The point is if we are going to be invading peoples privacy we should be damn sure of what we are doing.

I just think if your going to screw up someones job, career, or life it should be for a good reason. Not because you think your helping them or want to save money. Hey but what do I know.

 

[tonyorion]

Prometheus: the Hooter's position is clearly against the law which prohibits discrimination due to weight. Moreover, this case is absolutely irrelevant to the topic at hand which is: do companies have the right to discriminate against or terminate employees because of smoking/drug use?

As to rbuck's ludicrous "nicotine in a persons system does not mean cancer,smoking or not whats next", there are only a few ways to get nicotine into your system: smoking, chewing (snus also), or smoking cessation which includes e cigs. How could anyone ask the question "smokers drive up insurance cost ?" Do we really need to rehash all of the data and arguments that clearly point to the link between smoking and a whole bunch of other diseases? We are all here because we think that e cigs are sexy and have pretty lights and dials and not because we had health concerns over our smoking.

The fact remains, which you all seem to completely ignore, that smoking significantly increases your health risks, not only for cancer but for other diseases as well. The arguments about DNA markers is specious. Genetic defects are not voluntary but hereditary just as height, race, etc. are hereditary. If an employer were to use these markers to discriminate, he would be in violation of both the spirit and letter of the law.

On the other hand, smoking is an addiction and voluntary. I am(was) an addict: had it not been for ecigs, I would not have had a clue on how to break a +35 year 1.5 pack/day habit; all I have done is substitute one addiction for another-hopefully the much safer one. Even in retirement, it is costing me extra insurance money now (out of my own pocket) because I show positive for nicotine. E cigs are still in nowhere land as far as the long term risks are concerned because we do not have enough definitive data, so insurers are taking the safe route.

There is no question that there is an increased health insurance cost associated with employees who smoke as well as the cost of employment. I have seen the numbers often enough in negotiating with group health insurers. Smokers have more sick days and the illnesses tend to be more serious.

So to answer RippleinStillWater's question "when does the company end and our private life begin?" It ends when your private life does not cost my company money, and that includes paying for your addictions in terms of extra insurance premiums and extra sick days. You cost my company money when you go out on your lunch break to puff some weed or snort a bit, come back high, then start operating expensive equipment which you mishandle enough to cause serious injury to a coworker, then you are a liability and not an asset.

That poor guy lost his hand, but it is the price he had to pay for someone else's addiction. Some of you actually believe that your right to behave like jerk supercedes another person's right to life and limb.

If drug tests show that you are a user, you will not be hired. Then I do not have to wait around for you to cause an accident with a company car while under the influence of drugs. There were enough issues for me to deal with, so I will have zero tolerance in dealing with someone else's addictions.

Don't say that it does not happen, because I have seen it often enough.

Quit picking on my fellow Ivy League MBA's!!! We did not create the current situation; the sorry state of our economy is clearly the fault of rampant consumerism and deficit spending. Everyone in this country is guilty. We are just really starting to pay the price now. Do not get me started on this!! I have been screaming at the top of my lungs for years that we are no longer a nation that creates wealth, but that is not the topic of this thread.

The really troubling issue is that we cannot yet separate smoking from nicotine use since there is no test available to distinguish between the two (yet). So we are all penalized.

 

[prometheus]

Yes I know the topic... I started it thanks. The topic again for tonyorion is what do you think of an employer that uses drug tests to screen out people that use LEGAL substances. Particularly tobacco. As for "the Hooter's position is clearly against the law" well that may be but the courts have ruled in favor of Hooters in that case and many others. There are dozens of these cases each year from Hooters and the company wins them stating its no different then what Dallas does with there cheerleaders. So are you saying that the courts no longer hold up the law?

Just try rereading the first post dude. The only reason I even mentioned drug tests is because it was how they determined he had nicotine in his system. Sorry next time I will say he had yellow fingers lol. And yes I mentioned weight in the first post too but not weed or anything else. I don't mind you bringing it up if it serves a purpose but see no reason for a rant about your workers doing drugs all the time. Trust me it was a simple food for thought kind of question and not whether we should all go to work hopped up.

We are all here because we think that e cigs are sexy and have pretty lights and dials and not because we had health concerns over our smoking.

LMAO
Really? Yeah my 72 year old mom loves those dials. Post that in the Polls section and see what people say...

 

[rbuck9]

my ludicrous statement ?
please before you ramble know what your rambling about nicotine is in more than just tobacco
lets see ive smoked for 30 yr been to the doc once a yr and no more for 30 yr
paid my insurance so i must be an anomaly no sick days hmm
and since your an mba do some digging, you may just find out that using smoking as
a reason to raise premiums is just another excuse in a long line of excuses
to justify pilfering

 

[prometheus]

please before you ramble know what your rambling about nicotine is in more than just tobacco

Rbuck9 here is a little list for you I found real quick. Eggplant, red peppers, tomatoes and potatoes all contain nicotine. Not sure how much though. Also pesticide has nicotine in it which is kind of funny with the Scott's guy. Wonder if he could have been exposed to pesticide lol

 

[Nova Sphere]

So to answer RippleinStillWater's question "when does the company end and our private life begin?" It ends when your private life does not cost my company money, and that includes paying for your addictions in terms of extra insurance premiums and extra sick days. You cost my company money when you go out on your lunch break to puff some weed or snort a bit, come back high, then start operating expensive equipment which you mishandle enough to cause serious injury to a coworker, then you are a liability and not an asset.

That poor guy lost his hand, but it is the price he had to pay for someone else's addiction. Some of you actually believe that your right to behave like jerk supercedes another person's right to life and limb.

If drug tests show that you are a user, you will not be hired. Then I do not have to wait around for you to cause an accident with a company car while under the influence of drugs. There were enough issues for me to deal with, so I will have zero tolerance in dealing with someone else's addictions.

Don't say that it does not happen, because I have seen it often enough.

Quit picking on my fellow Ivy League MBA's!!! We did not create the current situation; the sorry state of our economy is clearly the fault of rampant consumerism and deficit spending. Everyone in this country is guilty. We are just really starting to pay the price now. Do not get me started on this!! I have been screaming at the top of my lungs for years that we are no longer a nation that creates wealth, but that is not the topic of this thread.

The really troubling issue is that we cannot yet separate smoking from nicotine use since there is no test available to distinguish between the two (yet). So we are all penalized.

The thought of grouping a smoker or ecigg user being on par with drug users or drink abusers, is beyond me!
More people with uptight "A type" personalitys and or people serious depression problems, who may also smoke or non smoke or not smoke, are at more serious risk of developing physical problems, than a person who makes it a habit to keep a positive attitude about life.

Nova!