Smokers need not apply...

[CunningStunts]

I am all for the owner of the business having the right to hire who he wants to hire. Even if it is only people who don't smoke OR people that DO smoke. Its his business, if it fails or succeeds is all on his decisions.

IN theory I agree... But based purely on statistics, you could replace the word "SMOKER" in that article with "Obese person" or "minority" or "women" and you'd technically be correct as well. Does that make it ok? Probably not!

The sad reality these days is that due to PC, it's ok to discriminate against certain groups of people but not others... I don't care either way, but at least be consistent!! I smoke, and I'm more productive than 98% of the people I work with... and I'd be ok with paying more for insurance, but eliminating me from a job because I smoke is just retarded!

 

[Maria the SnakeBabe]

I see your point and did think of that but then got to thinking that actually is the point, by not hiring the fat guy, or the minority, or whatever he may be losing a great employee but it is his company, it is his money on the line and if it fails cause he is an idiot thats fine, it was his choices that did it.
Eh..I am just unhappy with what the Gov did to restaurants and smokers. If a guy wants a smoking restaurant he should have the right to have one. I do not smoke, I actively looked for restaurants that had chosen to be non smoking. That seems to be the way the system of freedom should work. As much as I am happy not to have to smell it anymore I would rather the restaurant owner made the choice themselves. But ya, it would lead to that problem. :sigh:

 

[Will E Worm]

That's blatant in your face discrimination if I've ever seen it.

Yes. :thumbsup:

 

[Facetious]

Fag smokers need not apply... medical marijuana 'patients'... OK.

IN theory I agree... But based purely on statistics, you could replace the word "SMOKER" in that article with "Obese person" or "minority" or "women" and you'd technically be correct as well. Does that make it ok? Probably not!

The sad reality these days is that due to PC, it's ok to discriminate against certain groups of people but not others... I don't care either way, but at least be consistent!! I smoke, and I'm more productive than 98% of the people I work with... and I'd be ok with paying more for insurance, but eliminating me from a job because I smoke is just retarded!

Now there's a voice of reason! :clap:

 

[thatskguy]

My company has fired one guy for taking a smoke break whenever he wanted. He couldn't understand that he could not just take a break whenever he wanted, the guy was 50something not some stupid kid either! The new guy we hired smokes, drives me nuts, he has been there two weeks and stretches his 15min breaks to 20 already. When he is having a stressful morning, what he thinks is stressful the guy has been there two weeks, all he does it bitch he wants a smoke.

Companies can hire smokers but they need to be fucking responsible about it!

 

[jjericho69]

I think once the person takes its first drag, they automatically think they get more rights than non-smokers.

 

[brodkill]

what if there are dozens of resumes and the one that fits the job the best is the smoker? no comapny is going to be stupid enough to not hire this person just because they smoke, that pretty stupid imo

people that do the hiring should knopw nthat people smoke and that it is very addictive and hard ro quit, therefore they need to have a designated place for the smokers to go have a smoke

when i let my workers go for a smoke break, i tell them to be quick, and if they take to long they have to stay that much longer at the end of there shift. i have never had a problem with this, because most smokers can go have a smoke and be back to work in under five minutes

 

[RichardNailder]

what if there are dozens of resumes and the one that fits the job the best is the smoker? no comapny is going to be stupid enough to not hire this person just because they smoke, that pretty stupid imo

Are you calling me stupid? :dunno:

In my experience, it's always a mistake to hire an addict - doesn't matter if it's tobacco, alcohol, meth or caffeine.

 

[StanScratch]

Comparing smokers to minorities is about as laughably ignorant as gun owners who compare themselves to Jews during WWII. It takes quite a drama queen to make those leaps.

 

[brodkill]

Are you calling me stupid? :dunno:

In my experience, it's always a mistake to hire an addict - doesn't matter if it's tobacco, alcohol, meth or caffeine.

i wouldnt hire a meth addict or an alcoholic

but i do not see the problem in hiring a smoker or a coffee addict

where i work there are both, and they are able to do there jobs just as well as someone who doesnt do either

 

[jjericho69]

Most companies provide a break room to refill your coffee cup and back to your chair. Smokers need to go outside and then they come back smelling like shit.

 

[Legzman]

Good. We do not need those sort of people working for us!!!!

fuck you

I will never again hire a smoker for a hourly position - bottom line - YOU WASTE TOO FUCKING MUCH TIME!

you don't want to hire smokers because they waste your time. OK, fine. It's your own fucking fault they waste your time, because you let them! Your the boss genius! Don't let them have a smoke till after the shoot or till lunch or whatever. If they do it anyway, then fuckin fire em!

This.
Smokers do not have 15 minute breaks like us non-smokers.
In most places, if one works for 8 hours, one gets two 15-minute breaks.
Not if that person is a smoker. A 15-minute break for a "fix" every hour is the norm. Of course, they cannot smoke near the building - they must do so in their car. So, to say they use 15 minutes is being kind. Most of the time, we are looking at about a half hour. Attempt to get them to work for a while without their little "fix", and you get a grumpy, unproductive mess of a being who will slow down the productivity of others.
I for one would be ecstatic if my employer stopped hiring smokers.

I used to smoke but quit almost 4 years ago. Mainly due to cost of cigarettes going through the roof, year after year. But also because it's so god damn inconvenient to smoke anymore. The fact you can't smoke outside is the biggest crock of fucking shit I've ever heard.

Companies can hire smokers but they need to be fucking responsible about it!

Exactly! :clap:

Comparing smokers to minorities is about as laughably ignorant as gun owners who compare themselves to Jews during WWII. It takes quite a drama queen to make those leaps.

Fuck your stupid. Have you not been reading this thread? It's the discrimination part of it that the smart people in this thread are talking about. Coincidentally smokers are the minority these days. SO, fuck off!

 

[RichardNailder]

fuck you

you don't want to hire smokers because they waste your time. OK, fine. It's your own fucking fault they waste your time, because you let them! Your the boss genius! Don't let them have a smoke till after the shoot or till lunch or whatever. If they do it anyway, then fuckin fire em!

So - why should I hire them only to have to fire them? :dunno:

I just find it much simpler to not hire them. :2 cents:

 

[MikeyK]

I'm very anti smoking but it is still a legal product and I think it is wrong to discriminate against people simply for smoking. If an employee takes too many smoking breaks they should be warned and told what their daily limit is. If they can't handle that then you let them go.

 

[Facetious]

I wonder if this employer would hire a legal card carrying medical marijuana 'patient'?

Aside: that's what the pot collectives are calling their clients now, a patient. :rofl2:

 

[larss]

Smoking is not that difficult to stop. We have been brainwashed into thinking that it is.
Nicotine is very addictive, but the strength of the addiction is actually very slight.
Read Allen Carr's Easyway - this is probably the best method of stopping - no drugs and no withdrawal and it has worked for most of the people that I know who have tried it, when the instructions are followed.

 

[Rane1071]

People will just say they don't smoke to get the job and then 'duck and dive' to grab a smoke when they can.

As an ex-smoker (2 years next month) I can see both sides of the argument.

Being a smoker doesn't necessarily mean someone isn't as productive as a non-smoker. Even when I was smoking I was first in and last out at work and was (still am) more productive than 3/4 of my co-workers.

All that said, I'm glad I stopped smoking and wish I gave it away sooner.

Remember kids smoking isn't cool!!

 

[larss]

:goodpost:

just over 2 years for me.

 

[The Grasshopper]

Fuck it. I'd have a cig during the interview.

 

[Facetious]

What a bunch of weakling pussies some smokers are, I mean... is it that big of a deal to not smoke for eight hours? I don't think so!:dunno:

Maybe I should quit altogether if I'm not that hooked... meh... fuck it, a pack lasts me damn near 3 days... big fuckin deal if it kills me....yea, so what, ya assholes, I wouldn't miss you either!! :thefinger::flame:

:currently out of smokes:





Aside: If alcoholism is said to be a disease, then why isn't tobacco dependency also a disease?