Humana Arizona will not employ people who smoke or use other tobacco products

[pipecleaner]

Just heard this on the radio news. Their plan is to test people for nicotine. Wonder if a lawsuit can be filed if you are rejected for chewing nic gum, wearing a patch, or vaping? Is nicotine a tobacco product?

An article here:
Humana won't hire smokers in Arizona - USATODAY.com

 

[SlomChom]

I've noticed recently (over the past year or so) more and more businesses that are testing for nicotine as a condition of employment... They include nicotine in the standard pre-employment drug test. It's quite ridiculous! As if finding a job wasn't hard enough already...

 

[kritter]

Need to start boycotting these companies any place that bans ecigs , employers or selling of their services or products!! Hit them where it hurts! Their WALLET$

 

[SlomChom]

Need to start boycotting these companies any place that bans ecigs , employers or selling of their services or products!! Hit them where it hurts! Their WALLET$

They aren't specifically targeting e-cigs, but we're still lumped in with the analog smokers (and other drug users). I'd really like to know if there was a way around it though. What about people using the patch or gum? It's an interesting situation that we're in here.

Oh, and Scott's Lawn also screens employees for nicotine.

 

[samuraijill]

My company just implemented a policy requiring all empps to be tobacco free by July 1st or face severe financial penalties with regards to the health plan. Fortunately, e-cigarettes are specifically allowed, which is why I came here in the first place and switched to vaping - it was the only way I could see to meet the deadline!

 

[SlomChom]

My company just implemented a policy requiring all empps to be tobacco free by July 1st or face severe financial penalties with regards to the health plan. Fortunately, e-cigarettes are specifically allowed, which is why I came here in the first place and switched to vaping - it was the only way I could see to meet the deadline!

It sounds like your company actually did some research and put thought into their policy instead of just banning ALL nicotine. Lucky you! lol

 

[Sandrita]

Hmm is that not illegal surely you can't be prevented employment due to being a smoker??!!

 

[Uncle Willie]

Companies can institute whatever policy they feel they need .. the nicotine test in many cases has more than one level of nicotine use indicated, in order to accomodate second hand smoke, etc ..

 

[Uncle Willie]

Hmm is that not illegal surely you can't be prevented employment due to being a smoker??!!

I don't know how it is in Spain, however, in the USA, yes ..

 

[angelad]

Smokers are not a protected class in most states. They are not in Ohio but I think they are in either KY or IN. Yes as long as it is not listed a a "protected class" then they can have whatever policy they want. I have paid a much high insurance premium at work for years for being a smoker.

 

[BGhere]

Companies can institute whatever policy they feel they need .. the nicotine test in many cases has more than one level of nicotine use indicated, in order to accomodate second hand smoke, etc ..

Umm actually I dont think companies can institute whatever policies they think they need. The policies, must still be within the law. Should they not hire someone at pepsi, because they drink a coke now and then? They could test for it I'm sure . I am feeling snarky today

 

[user]

alot of people dont realize nicotine IS a drug, just a legal one. But it IS more harmful then others. js

 

[erinpac]

Umm actually I dont think companies can institute whatever policies they think they need. The policies, must still be within the law. Should they not hire someone at pepsi, because they drink a coke now and then? They could test for it I'm sure . I am feeling snarky today

Wasn't there a driver fired for drinking the competition's soda on the news?

It depends on state laws, but in most states if it is not firing for being part of a protected class (minority, age, disabled, etc.), then they can fire for what they want to. There are many perfectly legal things that some jobs do not allow.

 

[iball]

Heh. The military is trying that "ban smoking" trick as well but they're finding it impossible to tell service members toting weapons in combat zones "hey, you can't smoke".
So now it's 50 meters from any building and very, very, vary "lax" at FOBs.

 

[CaliChic]

At Ft. Stewart, an Army Post, they have gone "no electronic cigarettes" within certain buildings. On the upside, the e-cig has apparently reached the troops. Even on deployment.

 

[jpargana]

alot of people dont realize nicotine IS a drug, just a legal one. But it IS more harmful then others. js

caffeine is ALSO a drug, just a legal one... sometimes it is harmful too. (At least, for those the doctor tells them 'you should stop drinking coffe'...)
Should coffe drinkers start having trouble in finding a job, too??

Just my 2 cents...

 

[angelad]

I'm not saying I think it's right. I am just saying that it is perfectly legal in most states. Not that I agree but employers rational on this is that smokers are sick more, take more breaks and cost more in insurance premiums than nonsmokers. I think it is more a cost containment than a moral decision not to hire smokers. The only way to not allow this, is to make smokers a protected class, good luck with that- we can't even get a law stating that gays/lesbiens are a protected class in most states.

 

[angelad]

I don't think nicotine is a more harmful drug than caffenine at all. Smoking cigs is more harmful due to the chemicals but the nicotine isn't anymore harmful than caffenine.

 

[Baldr]

Hmm is that not illegal surely you can't be prevented employment due to being a smoker??!!

Smokers are a protected class? Sorry, that pretty clearly isn't the case. They are making rules that make smokers stand outside in the cold/rain/sun to smoke. Many houses/apartments have a no smoking clause in the lease. In many areas, even bars aren't allowed to choose whether smoking is allowed or not - the government is deciding for them. Not to mention that 1/2 the cost of a pack is taxes. If the rabid anti-smoking crowd gets any more rabid, they'll be spitting on smokers every time they see them, with the law behind them.

If company wants to hire only non smokers and make you piss in a cup to prove it, they can get away with that.

The fact that the economy is bad and there are a lot more people looking for jobs than there are jobs available makes it easier on them. If things were the other way around, where there were tons of job openings and few people to fill those jobs, they would be more interested in filling the jobs than in finding reasons to say no. But as it stands, they can say "no smokers" and still fill the jobs.

 

[angelad]

I'm in Ohio and you can't smoke inside any building open to the public. I used to be on a "mom's board" and they would complain and complain about people standing OUTSIDE to smoke. I always just laughed and told them that the car exhausts from the 100 cars they just walked by will not hurt them but those smokers shouldnt be able to get away with smoking outside a store! lol