Ineligible for Job Based on Nicotine in System
- Thread starter wv2win
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
Yeah, it's all about the other CRAP in those lit tobacco cigarettes to me. 2 weeks after I quit analogs and began to vape, I lit one up and just about choked on it.
I felt dizzy and tingly, too! And it was my old, usual brand... that allegedly has LESS nicotine in it than what I am vaping.
Go figure.
I felt dizzy and tingly, too! And it was my old, usual brand... that allegedly has LESS nicotine in it than what I am vaping.
Go figure.
Yeah, SHS hasn't been shown to be that risky except for certain people with pre-existing respiratory problems, oh and it may increase the incidence of ear infections in children. I remember that little lie, though. I still hear it every now and then.
Oh, and don't forget "Third hand smoke."
This friggin' "EVERYBODY PANIC!!!" herd mentality would be hilarious if it weren't so annoying.
Oh, and don't forget "Third hand smoke."
This friggin' "EVERYBODY PANIC!!!" herd mentality would be hilarious if it weren't so annoying.
hearing quite similiar concerns when DNA testing came about. Just wait, things won't be about race or religion anymore, it'll be your genetic makeup. If employers can terminate you because of something that's legal, but, more cost effective, why not hire the most genetically non-predisposed to all those nasty things in life right off the bat before the interview? Now, it's nicotine, I wouldn't be surprised one day if you've got to give a DNA sample for a life insurance policy.8-o
Yet we still don't hear any hiring restrictions on blood alcohol levels, do we?
don't for get overweight. Then about what 50 to 60 of cna to to doctors can't get a job there. good stuff.
Weight is already a issue in some places in certain states already when being hired, or keeping your job..
....get ready to bow to your new insurance overlord's.
It's going to take a major miracle to get people to quit going along with this mess they come up with.
....get ready to bow to your new insurance overlord's.
It's going to take a major miracle to get people to quit going along with this mess they come up with.
But it's OK to be exposed to Merca and Staff infections once you go through the door? Take those little things home to your family and friends.
Yup - apparently you can work in a hospital ...... as a fart, with no idea what you are doing, maybe giving wrong doses, but if you DARE to have nicotine..woah then you're for it!
Perhaps they are unaware that no-one has ever been convicted of killing someone while driving/living/getting in fights/abusing spuses and children under the influence of nicotine....
Well, as a matter of fact, blood alcohol content DOES count. Most places (except maybe a bar) will fire you if you come to work with alcohol in your system. If they suspect such, they can send you to a hospital to get a BAC level, or have you breathalyzed.
More and more places are using the "nicotine in your blood" excuse to lower insurance overhead costs. Smokers cost companies a lot of money because of smoking-related illness. Vaping is a ligitimate alternative and, as far as we know, is not as dangerous as burning tobacco, inhaling it and all the crap that burns with it. Maybe vaping will become a ligimate alternative....or at least someone might be able to convince their employer that nicotine does not necessarily mean SMOKING.
More and more places are using the "nicotine in your blood" excuse to lower insurance overhead costs. Smokers cost companies a lot of money because of smoking-related illness. Vaping is a ligitimate alternative and, as far as we know, is not as dangerous as burning tobacco, inhaling it and all the crap that burns with it. Maybe vaping will become a ligimate alternative....or at least someone might be able to convince their employer that nicotine does not necessarily mean SMOKING.
Questions and Answers About the Americans with Disabilities Act's Association Provisionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Americans_with_Disabilities_Act_of_1990
Personally, I would be in a catch-22 with an employer such as this one. If I give up nicotine so that I can be hired, I destroy my value as an employee. Without nicotine I have problems concentrating, thinking, and remembering.
Were I in this situation, I would need to file a complaint with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). Call the EEOC at (800) 669-4000.
The tricky thing would be a) the diagnosis and b) your doctor's cooperation. It probably would not fly if you claimed "nicotine addiction" as the diagnosis.
However, there is research on nicotine helping to control the symptoms of a variety of diseases including attention deficit disorder and fibromyalgia. I have a doctor who, for example, understands that nicotine works just as well for me at controlling attention deficit disorder as the prescription medications. Nicotine is a lot less dangerous.
The amusing thing is that if I were taking the prescription treatment instead of using nicoitne, I would fail the pre-employment drug screening. The prescription treatment (methamphetamine) is a "controlled substance."
Personally, I would be in a catch-22 with an employer such as this one. If I give up nicotine so that I can be hired, I destroy my value as an employee. Without nicotine I have problems concentrating, thinking, and remembering.
Were I in this situation, I would need to file a complaint with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). Call the EEOC at (800) 669-4000.
The tricky thing would be a) the diagnosis and b) your doctor's cooperation. It probably would not fly if you claimed "nicotine addiction" as the diagnosis.
However, there is research on nicotine helping to control the symptoms of a variety of diseases including attention deficit disorder and fibromyalgia. I have a doctor who, for example, understands that nicotine works just as well for me at controlling attention deficit disorder as the prescription medications. Nicotine is a lot less dangerous.
The amusing thing is that if I were taking the prescription treatment instead of using nicoitne, I would fail the pre-employment drug screening. The prescription treatment (methamphetamine) is a "controlled substance."
This is what happens when you go outside to vape like a smoker. You don't see the inhaler crowd going outside with the smokers....the patch people don't go outside....separate yourself from smokers or they will always treat it like smoking....the vapor output is so low, you should be able to vape quietly at your desk....but vaping is labor intense, it takes longer with more BS to get a good nic hit.....it's best to quit vaping and get on with living your life ....let other people argue about vaping indoors or nic intake testing....life's too short, live it. If you quit cigarettes for ever(I have), then quiting vaping should be doable, you just need to plan your escape....flavored zero nic juice with clouds of vape is a starting place.
Last edited:
As unfair as this may seem, what about job that hire based upon their physical factors like Fire Departments, Police, etc? My father used to tell me about not getting hired at place because his blood pressure was too low. There was a concern he would pass out while carrying something volatile and cause an explosion or similar disaster.
I would think employers are free to use whatever hiring standards they deem fit so long as it doesn't violate the big no-no's (Race, gender, religion, age, etc). This nicotine bias could be easily disguised: Every "finalist" for a position is required to take a physical. Those with nicotine would just not be chosen for the position. I have hired many people over the years and to my knowledge I am not required to tell a candidate why they were not chosen to fill a position.
I would think employers are free to use whatever hiring standards they deem fit so long as it doesn't violate the big no-no's (Race, gender, religion, age, etc). This nicotine bias could be easily disguised: Every "finalist" for a position is required to take a physical. Those with nicotine would just not be chosen for the position. I have hired many people over the years and to my knowledge I am not required to tell a candidate why they were not chosen to fill a position.
Understood. But the problem with this employer is that they are categorically requiring no nicotine from any source.
Thank God I don't need to go out at this point in my life and face such blatant ignorance. I'm getting ready to retire.
I pity the younger crowd if this stuff keeps up. I think we need to come together and dream up some ways to nip this in the bud.
Apart from doing it sneakily as you suggest is quite possible, quite a few states have enacted protective legislation, preventing overt employment discrimination against smokers.
"As of 1997 there are 29 states that legally prohibit employers from hiring/firing employees due to their off-work smoking status. They are: Maine, New Hampshire, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, New Jersey, West Virginia, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Louisiana, Mississippi, Tennessee, Kentucky, Indiana, Illinois, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Missouri, Oklahoma, South Dakota, North Dakota, Wyoming, Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada, Oregon and Montana.
The District of Columbia and the city of Boston have enacted legislation which prohibits employment discrimination against smokers.
In ANY state not on that list, employers can choose not to hire smokers--or not to hire non-smokers--if they want to. If the boss is a smoker, he or she could just as easily choose to hire only smokers for jobs in his/her company. It cuts both ways. Only job discrimination based on ethnic background, religion, political party, age, gender (and sometimes sexual preference) is prohibited in all states. Smokers are NOT a protected class with regard to jobs unless there is specific state legislation that protects them."
The Smoker's Club, Inc. Encyclopedia 2
Note that Tennnessee is listed in the above as having protective legislation. I have not checked the Tennessee statutes to verify, but if it does still have such legislation on its books, then perhaps this hospital will not be allowed to carry out its plan.
I do know that the Town of Amherst, NY's desire to do the same was recently scotched, precisely because it would have been illegal to discriminate in hiring against smokers under NY law. The news coverage about that was posted right here on ECF:
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/law-e-cigarette/55618-amherst-hiring-plan-goes-up-smoke.html
Last edited:
@yvilla--of course I was not advocating circumventing any law on the books--but apparently in the OP's case there is no such law on the books...
On a side note. I find is funny that many who advocate limited gov't intrusion into our lives now are clamoring for the gov't to enact another law. Guess its all about whose ox is being gored...........(This was not directed at any one person in particular-just a general observation)
On a side note. I find is funny that many who advocate limited gov't intrusion into our lives now are clamoring for the gov't to enact another law. Guess its all about whose ox is being gored...........(This was not directed at any one person in particular-just a general observation)
But the OP is talking about a hospital in Tennessee. I was suggesting that if in fact Tennessee does have such a protective law, the hospital may well not be allowed to carry out its plan.
But like I said, I have not personally checked TN's laws.
But like I said, I have not personally checked TN's laws.
Me neither. I do know that in my jurisdiction that non profits(many hospitals) and other service/ charitable type organizations are exempt from some of laws applicable to other businesses.............
We all probably need more education on this particular instance.
- Status
Similar threads
