My employer banned use of e-cigs...

[waylonjessi4ever]

Its not unusual at all here in no cal to have smokes banned even outside .Many have it here and always have .They can do whatever they want on their property or their leased property .It only takes one to make a thing of it and i really dont think they are going to care if we need to vape or not .Thats not an issue they are going to want to fight with other employees ,nor do they have the obligation to learn about it .

 

[cryx]

Now that REALLY does stink. Someone needs to get them to provide proof that the nicotine is harmful for starters. All are rights, (freedoms) are being snuffed out one by one.

I'll agree that it does "stink" for the OP, but your logic is dead wrong. An employer needs to provide no proof to ban certain behavior. Do they not have the right/freedom to ban drug use, sexual harassment, intimidation, inappropriate clothes, etc? It's their decision, period. If you don't like their decision/freedom, you have the freedom to find a job elsewhere. Well... Maybe not right now, but I'm sure multiple people would love to have your job!

You've posed a conundrum: to satisfy your freedom, you want to take away the freedom of a private property owner to make the rules on their property? By that logic, are you willing to sacrifice the freedom to make rules on your property and in your home? Freedom cuts both ways.

 

[dohsma]

To the OP, sorry to hear about that. I think until there are clearcut guidelines on ecigs, employers will enforce their own rules.

 

[arkywolf]

I think I am lucky. Before I started vapeing lst month I was able to smoke on the job any time i felt like it. In my opinion any bussiness should be able to chioce thier on likes and dislike providing it is with in the law. I never smoked in a store or other public place. Just because the second hand smoke is no longer there does not mean I plan on starting. If you come to my house I will tell you if your perfume or colonge bothers me. The next time you come over if still wearing same amount you will be asked to leave. An employer has the same right. Granted they may not understand. But here is some thing else to consider. Before I started vapeing I saw some mods and the very first thing that went through my mind was dope. I did not know any better. There are many side to almost everything out there. Sometimes we have to walk on the fence to make things balance.

 

[cryx]

Before I started vapeing I saw some mods and the very first thing that went through my mind was dope.

You're not kidding, a lot of box mods look like vaping off a hitter box...

 

[Sewnmachine]

I dont understand sheilding people from things. its freakin life. one day we're gonna wake up and realize we aren't human anymore. just robots walking around blissfully blind to the real world living in our cushy fake government approved lives.

Well, I do respectfully disagree. I believe in shielding children from all sorts of things. Smoking and second hand smoke is just one thing. Kids aren't mature enough to discern what a cushy fake government approved life is like. They just tend to copy what they see. And actually I think it admirable that a pediatric facility will do whatever it takes to make sure that at the very least while a child is in their care, they will not be exposed to smoking - - - even at the risk of making their parents mad.

The free guest WIFI is also filtered to the point that curious teenagers cant type in a "key word" on their smartphones and download a host of undesirable images.
If while using their free wifi you would type in any word associated with cigarettes or smoking you will get a message that it has been blocked.

Big Brother gone too far? Maybe. But these are patients that are "underage" and so like any good custodian of minors limits need to be set. What they are allowed to do and see at home is their parents responsibility.

 

[RippleInStillWater]

Here is the situation at the Childrens Hospital I work at;
ALL smoking on campus is absolutely forbidden - not just for employees but for the parents of patients as well.
ALL nicotine products are forbidden for "new hires". If you test positive for nicotine you will NOT be hired.
Nicotine products include cigarettes, cigars, snuff, and yes...... e-cigarettes.
All manor of smoking cessation products are provided to employees free of charge as are support classes. Employees that were smokers prior to the new policy are "waivered" but strongly urged to quit.

From a medical stand point we all know the inherent dangers of the carcinogens, tars and additives in analog cigarettes. However nicotine is also a vaso-constrictor. In other words it can all by itself raise blood pressure and contribute to coronary artery disease.

Now, again, from an employers perspective, as medical insurance costs rise, it becomes an even greater insurable risk to insure employees that willing engage in an unhealthy lifestyle ( this also includes obesity due to indiscriminate diet).
As an employee we are given all sorts of free screenings for cholesterol, blood pressure, weight watchers programs, walking marathons etc.....etc.....etc.....
This is done in an attempt to have the healthiest workforce possible.....and thus.....keep our insurance and premiums manageable. When you really think about it.... it is a Win/Win.

And this would work out beautifully in a perfect world.
The reality is - stressed out parents stand outside on the street (off campus) and smoke,
And I - - - stealth vape in the womens bathroom.

But the logic is sound.

No it is not, it is a knee-jerk reaction to a substance frowned upon by general siciety, its an east PR move, nothing else IMO. Can you give them some of typical ECF stuff like the studies, links, etc. that people bring with them to the airports and this very kind of situation before when others have tried to educate an employer or other entity looking to ban our salvation?

I was looking for a flawed logic quote but this is the best I came up with!!!

Mr. Spock, the women on your planet are logical. That's the only planet in the galaxy that can make that claim.

-- Kirk

 

[leeshor]

I'll agree that it does "stink" for the OP, but your logic is dead wrong. An employer needs to provide no proof to ban certain behavior. Do they not have the right/freedom to ban drug use, sexual harassment, intimidation, inappropriate clothes, etc? It's their decision, period. If you don't like their decision/freedom, you have the freedom to find a job elsewhere. Well... Maybe not right now, but I'm sure multiple people would love to have your job!

You've posed a conundrum: to satisfy your freedom, you want to take away the freedom of a private property owner to make the rules on their property? By that logic, are you willing to sacrifice the freedom to make rules on your property and in your home? Freedom cuts both ways.

I agree with only a portion of your premise. I totally understand a smoking ban and I understand dress codes and I understand private property rights as well as anyone. BUT our rights are being eroded and as some have stated, where does it stop. Nicotine use is not harmful and second hand smoke isn't even a consideration when using an E-Cig but they are treating it as if it was. The (proposed or otherwise), ban on E-Cig use on planes is an example of over reaching. The other things you mention are for the most part not legal in the first place so of course the employer has a "right" to ban it.

Where does it all stop?

 

[Sewnmachine]

Well, nicotine is a vaso constrictor. It just is. Constrict your arteries enough and you're just.....well.....dead.
I'm not sure if parents can vape while on hospital premises - I've never seen anyone try it. But like I said earlier I have vaped openly at adult hospitals.
As an employer they can ban/discourage the use of nicotine for their employees. Nicotine apart from cigarettes does have it's own inherent health risks.
I do agree that it is unfortunate that vaping gets lumped into the same trick bag as smoking analogs. And yes, I also agree that for the most part it is a knee jerk reaction. (I don't know what east PR is).
I tried (in vain) to explain onetime that vaping is really not alot different than the smoking cessation products available. Those all deliver nicotine (that we smokers crave) but it is delivered without the smoke/tars/additives. My explanation fell on deaf ears.
So, I think we will all just have to wait and watch for the general public to catch up and educate themselves about what constitutes smoking versus vaping.
It's heartening to see though that places like Walgreen drugstores are starting to sell e-cigs. (BLU I think). That's a start.

What I'm waiting for to happen is that nicotine users, over eaters, bungy jumpers and rock climbers will have to start paying a higher health insurance premium because of our......bad lifestyle choices!

 

[Clover~]

sewmachine, I guess I was thinking more from my experience. my parents sheilded me so much I went a bit crazy wild when I was 18-19. Over protecting and shielding can be bad.
And I really hope you didnt mean that last part in your last post! you dont really want the gubberment to start making people pay higher health insurance premiums because of their individual lifestyle choices? that sounds complicated.

 

[Skyway]

Curious, I would venture to guess that they would still not even listen if you had 0 nic juice. One of the main problems we are going to have to face in the future I believe. The ecig by itself is nothing for anyone to be afraid of. It all comes down to the juice that someone uses. Since their is no easy way of telling if someone is using 0nic juice both sides will get the brunt end of it.
The believe the actual ecig itself is going to be forced into a tobacco product of some kind, I hope it doesnt but you know how big companies are. This is sad.

 

[waylonjessi4ever]

Well here in cali you cant get private life ins if you are a smoker or if you can it will be really really high .
The employer provided life ins has never asked for a physical .
As to testing in the above post for nicotine..i would not work for that kind of employer even if i had to work at mcdonalds instead .Illegal drugs are a different matter entirely imho .
Clover you are right ,thats why kids in college go entirely wild ,over the top with partying .

 

[Sewnmachine]

sewmachine, I guess I was thinking more from my experience. my parents sheilded me so much I went a bit crazy wild when I was 18-19. Over protecting and shielding can be bad.
And I really hope you didnt mean that last part in your last post! you dont really want the gubberment to start making people pay higher health insurance premiums because of their individual lifestyle choices? that sounds complicated.

God no!!! I gues what I should have said is that I am DREADING the day that employers start making "high risk" employees start paying higher premiums.

 

[cryx]

Ok, good point that I mixed illegal activity. I've worked at various companies that banned: strong perfumes, buttered microwave popcorn, flags or banners of any kind, food or eating in the work area, taking personal calls for more than a few minutes, electronic shopping at work, "provocative" pictures that included beach photos, required business casual, forced employees to use a mac or pc, no personal computers connected to the network, no alcoholic beverages, no smoking anywhere on company property, random pee in a cup drug tests with someone watching, required on-site physicals or no health insurance, no office dating, no profanity, etc. The list goes on and on. Everyone will find some or most as ridiculous if not insulting.

My point is an employer has freedoms, which I'll admit we don't always like the OPs situation, but that's the price of a free society. If you own it then you make the rules. If you don't like someone's rules, then you find someone else more aligned with your beliefs. Freedoms need to be universally respected, otherwise a fixation on one's own freedom is more akin to anarchy.

 

[gman1000]

Just from what I can gather, if a person were to vape 0 nic juice or got a straw and blew some flour out of it while in the locale's proximity they would not be excluded. If so, that would mean it has nothing to do with the nicotine content but just the perception of the act of smoking. Judging by how the employer offers patch & gum alternatives to employees to keep cigs out of sight.

No matter how hard you may try to shield your kids, unless you are joined at the hip to them, you can't keep them from learning things for themselves. You can only steer them as best you can down the right path & love them all you can.

In the case of freedoms being respected, I agree, but when one has the freedom to restrict others, under the guise of continued employment, I do not agree with that. It gives those with authority the right to exercise their opinionated dominion over others openly and without argument or protest. It sounds more like subjugation. Employers have tools at their disposal, At-Will policies, Non-disclosure agreements, & others that circumvent the law to their favor. Kind of like....what happens in Vegas....

Just a touch of a history lesson. The last time some individuals fixated on their freedoms, they formed the greatest country in the world.

 

[leeshor]

I want the 60's back.... PC run amuck these days.

 

[VapingRulz]

Well, nicotine is a vaso constrictor. It just is. Constrict your arteries enough and you're just.....well.....dead. !

The same is true of caffeine. Are they also banning coffee and cola? (Rhetorical question, of course.)

 

[cryx]

In the case of freedoms being respected, I agree, but when one has the freedom to restrict others, under the guise of continued employment, I do not agree with that. It gives those with authority the right to exercise their opinionated dominion over others openly and without argument or protest. It sounds more like subjugation. Employers have tools at their disposal, At-Will policies, Non-disclosure agreements, & others that circumvent the law to their favor. Kind of like....what happens in Vegas....

You can't have it both ways... Employment is a contract. If you don't like the terms of the contract, and enter the contract anyway, then you are willfully choosing to be subjugated. You do have the freedom to terminate the contract and work somewhere else. You also have the freedom to create a business where you can make the rules. Employment is a privilege.

Just a touch of a history lesson. The last time some individuals fixated on their freedoms, they formed the greatest country in the world.

They sure did, and they'd tell you freedom is not the right to do whatever you, whenever you want. Look, the employer's decision is unfortunate, but moaning about "the man keeping us down" gets us nowhere. All the OP can do is try to politely educate the decision makers.

 

[gman1000]

Hi cryx, I understand that employment is a privilege and have moved on when I feel that policy favors certain specifics or classes of workers. I said that I didn't agree with it and expressed my opinion as that has been my past experience with certain former employers.

Also, yes the employers decision is unfortunate & the employee has the right to plea their case, choose to abide or seek employment elsewhere.

Freedom can be interpreted in many ways and frankly I respect that of others to express themselves. I stand corrected in what may have been seen as let's just do bad things cause we can. As for the man, the biggest insult to individual rights has been the Patriot Act, whole other ball game there. UGH!!!

JMHO,
gman1000

 

[ekoms up]

My company has completely banned tobacco on the property since Ohio passed the law a few years back. Thats what brought me to v4l and I haven't looked back! It turned out to be a blessing in disguise. I stealth mine all day!