Smokers Can't Get Jobs

"Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo" (rustyvandura) 04/12/2016 at 14:31 • Filed to: None

1

69

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

StingrayJake > Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo 04/12/2016 at 14:34

3

My company has a strict no-tobacco policy with random drug testing.

duurtlang > StingrayJake 04/12/2016 at 14:36

7

That’s such an American thing. Drug testing at work? Why? Who cares what someone does in their free time? Freedom?

Xyl0c41n3 > StingrayJake 04/12/2016 at 14:40

2

They test for tobacco while testing for illegal drugs? I'm no fan of smoking, but that seems excessive and unnecessarily intrusive.

HammerheadFistpunch > duurtlang 04/12/2016 at 14:40

1

http://jalopnik.com/5753895/chrysl…

CalzoneGolem > duurtlang 04/12/2016 at 14:41

1

We are only as free as we feel.

StingrayJake > Xyl0c41n3 04/12/2016 at 14:42

1

Yes

TheRealBicycleBuck > duurtlang 04/12/2016 at 14:45

4

It isn’t about what they are doing on their free time. It’s about what they are doing while at work. When I was working in a chemical plant, we had a guy that would go get high on his lunch break. Same guy drove a forklift through a wall and in a separate incident, knocked down a storage rack with 6 tons of packaged materials. He was lucky he didn’t kill himself or one of his coworkers.

Sam > duurtlang 04/12/2016 at 14:45

2

It’s mostly a liability thing. If a guy smokes some cannabis (non-medically) before work, then falls off a ladder, the company’s insurance won’t cover it and there will probably be legal problems as well.

TheRealBicycleBuck > Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo 04/12/2016 at 14:46

0

Nobody told the people of Louisiana. I don’t park on the third floor of the garage because that is where all the smokers in our building gather....

duurtlang > HammerheadFistpunch 04/12/2016 at 14:47

1

Introducing sanctions for those under the influence of drugs while at work is very different from doing so for those that have trace elements in their system.

Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo > StingrayJake 04/12/2016 at 14:48

0

Drug testing for tobacco ? No kidding? What sort of company do you work for?

Sam > Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo 04/12/2016 at 14:48

13

Hah. Looks like they should probably stop smoking then.

Smokers get too much special treatment in a lot of work. When I worked at the car dealership, the smokers would get to take a 15+ minute break every hour to smoke and since I didn’t smoke, I didn’t get a break. And honestly, it makes no sense to give someone a break to go do drugs.

Dr. Zoidberg - RIP Oppo > Xyl0c41n3 04/12/2016 at 14:49

3

From a cost-cutting for Healthcare standpoint by an employer, tobacco has more health risks than say cocaine or marijuana.

Xyl0c41n3 > Dr. Zoidberg - RIP Oppo 04/12/2016 at 14:52

1

I'm aware of that. But come on, what's the likelihood of people working their entire career at one employer nowadays? I think smoking is awful. I've lost family members to the effects of it. I never have (and never will) touch a cigarette. But right now, smoking is legal and an employer choosing to regulate what an employee does in their off time bugs me. Maybe that's the Texan in me, liberal though I am otherwise.

duurtlang > Sam 04/12/2016 at 14:52

0

I like your name in this context. Anyway, having an employee under the influence of a mind altering substance, whether legal or illegal, is a serious liability. However, if you’ve smoked cannabis Friday night it has no effect on your ability to do your job on Monday in any way, yet it will still show up in a drug test.

jariten1781 > duurtlang 04/12/2016 at 14:53

2

Because, regardless of your opinions on whether it should be legal, what they're doing in their free time can get them arrested and/or require them to spend a bunch of time in court. Why should the company have to dick around getting people to cover their shifts and why should they invest in training someone who may end up unable to perform their tasks due to their illegal recreational activities?

citizennick > StingrayJake 04/12/2016 at 14:54

0

My last job did the same.

TheRealBicycleBuck > Sam 04/12/2016 at 14:54

0

I have a friend in the corporate liability insurance business. She just told me about a tree trimmer who fell off a ladder and broke his hip. Insurance is covering the emergency care, but will not cover anything beyond that since they discovered he was high when he was on the ladder. Yeah, no pun intended, he tested positive for cannabis.

citizennick > Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo 04/12/2016 at 14:55

3

Mine did the same thing. Job also came with health benefits so I can understand why they would do that as it keeps the premiums down.

ttyymmnn > Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo 04/12/2016 at 14:55

1

The WaPo had an article recently about how deaths of white women in rural areas has spiked when compared to deaths of white women in cities. This has been directly linked to smoking and obesity.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/national/20…

StingrayJake > Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo 04/12/2016 at 14:56

1

They test for nicotine. And a big one. I’d rather not reveal too much info.

Ash78, voting early and often > Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo 04/12/2016 at 14:56

0

The only no-tobacco policies I’ve seen have been upcharges for healthcare (often very punitive). But I’ve never seen them tested. It’s more like honor code — I guess if you go into the doc with emphysema, they could theoretically deny you if you lied about smoking.

ttyymmnn > Sam 04/12/2016 at 14:57

7

Same here. Back when I was doing shift work, I would take a smoke break every hour even though I didn’t smoke. I figured that if the smokers got to take a break, I should be able to take one too.

themanwithsauce - has as many vehicles as job titles > duurtlang 04/12/2016 at 14:57

1

Well with my company if they even think you might be responsible for an accident (I work at a chemical plant) you have to report to a medical center down the street for a quick test for alcohol, weed, coke, and meth. Maybe a few others too. Sometimes you have to go down randomly.....Apparently we’ve almost blown up Grand Rapids, MI because some people got high.

Shamoononon drives like a farmer > Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo 04/12/2016 at 14:58

0

I’m betting the reasons for them smoking is more likely the culprit of un-employment than the smoking itself. Therefor, whether they smoke or quit they’d probably be in the same situation. Also, is the author really stating that someone in SAN FRANCISCO is less motivated because they spend 6$ on cigarettes? Rent is like 3k a month.

Sam > duurtlang 04/12/2016 at 15:02

0

To be honest, cannabinoid testing is the silliest, because they will stay in your system for quite a while (for heavy users it can be several months). Did you know that in the U.S., having a high enough concentration of cannabinoids in your system while driving can get you a DUI, even if you are completely and totally sober?

ttyymmnn > Ash78, voting early and often 04/12/2016 at 15:06

0

My wife works for a large university in Texas, and we pay an additional $30/month in health care premiums for my cigar smoking. I should probably quit....

duurtlang > jariten1781 04/12/2016 at 15:08

4

The comeback question would be, to what extend should a company be allowed to breach the privacy of their employees when it comes to subjects not directly related to work?

Assume the following does not happen when someone is working. Should a company be able to fire someone for speeding? For cheating on their spouse (with an adult)? For illegally downloading a movie? Where does it end?

Chan - Mid-engine with cabin fever > duurtlang 04/12/2016 at 15:12

2

Someone who does drugs in his/her free time, compared to someone who doesn’t, is more likely to be under the influence while on the job.

And if all other things are roughly equal, except one candidate does drugs and the other doesn’t, guess which one is going to get the job?

Freedom is only from the government. You follow the laws, you get to stay out of jail. That does not extend to your ability to keep a job. You don’t get to be “free” from a school while you are a student, or your parents while you are still a dependent, or an employer while they are paying you for your un-influenced time.

Chan - Mid-engine with cabin fever > duurtlang 04/12/2016 at 15:17

1

Speeding, adultery and movie downloads do not generally have a direct effect job performance.

A history of employee drug use puts the company at risk for poor performance at best, and accident liability at worst. In between you have things like higher healthcare costs for the drug users, which puts the company at risk for higher insurance premiums.

Moves-Like-Senna > Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo 04/12/2016 at 15:19

0

Oddly, most of my opportunities have come with smoking. Whether professional or with ladies. I do live in Quebec, which has an insanely high smoking rate, but most startups I’ve consulted for or worked with came through because we met while outside a bar, cafe, or office building smoking (also, you’re almost like a rockstar if you work for startups here, it’s a big deal).

Even most ladies, I’ve gone out with, we met smoking outside a bar or elsewhere. It’s litterally an exclusive club people die to be a part of.

As oppo knows I quit about two months ago now, thoguh I did slip up and had half a pack the other night though memory of it is fairly fuzzy.

Chan - Mid-engine with cabin fever > ttyymmnn 04/12/2016 at 15:22

1

Do I smoke? Nahhh. Wait, are they going on a break? Yeah, I kinda do.

Chan - Mid-engine with cabin fever > Xyl0c41n3 04/12/2016 at 15:24

3

For one thing, smokers incur more healthcare expenses. Get enough of them and the employer could face steeper premium increases and more lost time.

Chan - Mid-engine with cabin fever > duurtlang 04/12/2016 at 15:27

0

I’m no cannabis expert, but even if you were correct, what’s to say that this guy will never smoke on Sunday after you hire him? Or Monday morning before coming in to work? Why not hire someone who tests negative and therefore is likely to never be under the influence? For most jobs, there are plenty of skilled candidates who don’t do weed.

Chan - Mid-engine with cabin fever > TheRealBicycleBuck 04/12/2016 at 15:29

0

The perfect example. Even if you don’t do it at work now per se , nothing will guarantee that things will stay the same after I hire you. That’s why companies do drug screening.

Jarrett - [BRZ Boi] > Sam 04/12/2016 at 15:32

1

Here’s a whole sheet of gold stars.

Chan - Mid-engine with cabin fever > Sam 04/12/2016 at 15:32

0

To be honest, if I were in charge of hiring policy, I wouldn’t change this one bit. I would want my company’s employees to be 100% clear of that stuff. If you need a job that badly, you can quit now and come in to interview when your system is clear.

iSureWilll > StingrayJake 04/12/2016 at 15:37

0

That seems totally ridiculous. You can get fired for... smoking cigarettes?

Dr. Zoidberg - RIP Oppo > Xyl0c41n3 04/12/2016 at 15:46

2

If half of your coworkers smoked and you were paying a fortune for very little coverage like me, you would not hold to that opinion.

If you have a shared company health plan that does not significantly increase costs on smokers, then smoking in your spare time affects your coworkers. Every year my plan gets more expensive (other than all the economic and social reasons) because we keep surpassing the funds set aside for healthcare.

ranwhenparked > Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo 04/12/2016 at 15:49

1

My company defines “smoker” as anyone that’s used any tobacco within the previous 12 months. Lying on the insurance form is grounds for immediate dismissal.

Our COO handed out Cohibas to everyone at the Christmas party about a month before that new policy took effect,so, thanks to him, like 90% of our employees are now smokers and have to pay like $100 extra a year for health insurance.

Xyl0c41n3 > Chan - Mid-engine with cabin fever 04/12/2016 at 15:58

0

Since my “I’m aware of that” doesn’t seem to be clear enough: I’m aware of the secondary and tertiary effects of smoking on a society. I wasn’t disputing them. I was disputing a company’s “right” to meddle in the personal freedoms of its employees. I disagree with that.

BigBlock440 > duurtlang 04/12/2016 at 16:00

2

Since employers are now forced to pay for their employees health insurance, they’re going to try and lower costs however possible.

Xyl0c41n3 > Dr. Zoidberg - RIP Oppo 04/12/2016 at 16:01

1

I’m aware of issues with our country’s health care system. I’m not disputing that. I’m not saying their shouldn’t be ramifications for people who, in this day and age, still choose to smoke (talking about newer smokers. This isn’t a dig at people who are addicted and trying to quit. Addiction is a nasty animal, but that's another conversation altogether). I'm talking about a company thinking it has the right to meddle in the personal lives of its employees. I disagree with that.

Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo > Shamoononon drives like a farmer 04/12/2016 at 16:01

1

I wouldn’t hire a smoker. They stink and they sneak off to have a smoke on a frequent basis. And they’re less healthy and they’re more likely to call in sick.

jariten1781 > duurtlang 04/12/2016 at 16:01

0

Yep, that is the question. People do entire dissertations on that topic so there’s not a lot of insight to be gained in a short forum thread. I’ll just say that companies drawing the line where they, from experience and risk ballance, determine to draw it is sufficient for me.

Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo > ttyymmnn 04/12/2016 at 16:05

2

If I interviewed someone who smelled of cigarets, I wouldn’t hire them. Next!

Chan - Mid-engine with cabin fever > Xyl0c41n3 04/12/2016 at 16:06

0

All I’m saying is a company is faceless and has no loyalty to country or person. It will take all legal measures to maximise profit and minimise loss, and that extends to its hiring policies. The health and moral implications of drugs are, as you stated, indisputable. But until you outlaw drug screening, social media checking, reference checking, gut feeling (half-kidding on this one), etc. these activities will continue to be valid hiring process.

Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo > Xyl0c41n3 04/12/2016 at 16:08

0

Smokers are less healthy and more inclined to call in sick. This is documented. They take frequent smoke breaks. And, quite frankly, they stink. I wouldn’t hire a smoker.

Shamoononon drives like a farmer > Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo 04/12/2016 at 16:22

0

I hate pot smokers in the same sense.

Shamoononon drives like a farmer > citizennick 04/12/2016 at 16:24

0

It would be at least as cost effective if they tested for genetic diseases.

Shamoononon drives like a farmer > Dr. Zoidberg - RIP Oppo 04/12/2016 at 16:29

1

I pointed out to someone earlier that you can now reliably check somebody’s genetics via a simple saliva swab for the risks of developing very costly diseases. Should we not also be able to perform this test to keep health costs down? Keep in mind that there is reliable data to show that even tobacco addiction can be tied to certain genes.

Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo > Shamoononon drives like a farmer 04/12/2016 at 16:49

1

Actually, I’d hire a pot smoker before I’d hire a cigaret smoker. But in practice, I’d hire niether because the piss test would catch both. And to be clear, I don’t hate the smoker, just the habit.

Shamoononon drives like a farmer > Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo 04/12/2016 at 18:01

1

I would probably just hire the one with the better education.

HFV has no HFV. But somehow has 2 motorcycles > Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo 04/13/2016 at 12:12

8

If I owned a business I wouldn’t high a smoker just because I wouldn’t want to pay them for the smoke brakes that feel so damn entitled too.

I don’t even like working with smokers. They do tend to be lazier, and always want me to pick up the slack for them when the need to “step outside”. I mean I don’t just walk out side for 5-10 minutes every hour for a fresh air brake, though I’d really like too.

Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo > HFV has no HFV. But somehow has 2 motorcycles 04/13/2016 at 13:01

3

I’m with you. And they stink.

Dayburner > Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo 04/15/2016 at 10:01

1

People who engage in one unhealthy habit addiction have a much harder time finding a job

humz > Sam 04/15/2016 at 10:10

0

This.

My wife actually worked at an airport back before we met, and she BECAME a smoker, because that was the only way to get breaks. Everyone of them would take regular breaks to go smoke, so she figured, ‘well, if that’s what it takes’. Which she admits in retrospect was really stupid, and has of course quit since then. But nevertheless... That is a thing.. An absurd thing that should never exist.

You would never tell an alcoholic, ‘yeah sure! Go take another break.. It has been a while since you had a drink.’ So I don't understand why this is acceptable.

Yourideaisdumb > HFV has no HFV. But somehow has 2 motorcycles 04/15/2016 at 10:16

0

It’s your right to take a break and get some air. I do it all the time. Take a walk around the block. Helps me think clearer, perform better.

I am a smoker but don’t smoke during work hours.

PapaKyle > Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo 04/15/2016 at 10:41

1

Smoking is the bane of our existence.

We have healthcare crisis because of it, but because Big Tobacco has lobbyists & $$$ up the wazoo, gov’t won’t do shit. NPR segment covered it saying Lung cancer in women drastically closed the gap in recent decades between men/women’s life expectancies due to Tobacco’s marketing tailored moreso to women; what used to be a pretty closed off market.

It’s utterly disgusting in all aspects for person’s hygene. I worked, in HS, at a restaurant and would have to clean yellow smut off the walls from it. I leave the office now and around the corner is smoking area which fills the air all around with that stale nasty-ass scent [among other things]. A homeless dude asked me for money with a cig in his hand, I wanted to say, ‘quit smoking and try again later.’

It litters the roadways cause the entitled motherf****s toss em out without regard to anything. I throw my hands up when behind em when I see it, and try to post it on the state’s litterbug reporting site. Deer eat the butts, become addicted and frequent the roadsides more often, contributing to additional car wrecks/etc/(?).

Seriously, all because... ‘it calms me down.’ Okay... I need a cig (NOT).

Mattbob > Shamoononon drives like a farmer 04/15/2016 at 10:43

0

How does unemployment cause smoking? Honestly, I don’t understand this.

d15b > HFV has no HFV. But somehow has 2 motorcycles 04/15/2016 at 10:44

0

I actually take a fresh air break just to step outside and stretch. Try it!

DeLM > HFV has no HFV. But somehow has 2 motorcycles 04/15/2016 at 10:44

0

where is your proof, you statistics on them being lazier? you just don’t like smokers and feel entitled to knock them be cause we are in country where everyone wants to be in everyone’s business for some damn reason. If their performance is unexceptionable then they will get fired. your guy’s comments are down right retarded, almost like i am reading the comments on gawker or something.

DeLM > DeLM 04/15/2016 at 10:47

0

oh yeah you can’t go off this article either since it’s sample area is the Bay area, know for it’s dipshittery and smugness.

PapaKyle > duurtlang 04/15/2016 at 10:50

0

Free time? Policies can’t be made that differentiate between those timing of when the person decides to smoke a joint. The night before versus the morning right before work... they have to be treated the same for the business, but the later Does affect work performance.

Funktheduck > HFV has no HFV. But somehow has 2 motorcycles 04/15/2016 at 11:04

1

Few days behind on this post but I’ll add in my $0.02.

I won’t hire smokers. Did it once and they were the worst. Never again

Back when I was in high school working at Papa John’s, all the smokers got constant breaks while us non smokers got none. It wasn't until we threatened to go to cooperate to complain that we started getting fresh air breaks. They weren't as long as the smoke breaks but better than nothing.

Eric @ opposite-lock.com > Dr. Zoidberg - RIP Oppo 04/15/2016 at 14:08

0

I have a similar problem at my employer. A large fraction of my coworkers smoke and that offsets the fact that they're mostly young males...

Shamoononon drives like a farmer > Mattbob 04/15/2016 at 14:35

0

I did not say unemployment causes smoking. I was stating that there is more likely an unemployment correlation tied to the reasons they smoke. Perhaps inferior genetics (tobacco addiction can be tied to genetics), less education, less parental influence, poorer upbringing, etc.

However, since you do mention it, I guess people would be more likely to smoke more, drink, or do drugs while unemployed. It’s got to be tough not being able to pay the bills and unfortunately sometimes those things bring momentary relief, though it will be paid for in the end.

HFV has no HFV. But somehow has 2 motorcycles > DeLM 04/16/2016 at 00:03

0

So I’m guessing you’re a smoker? Yes it is a bit of a generalization to say smokers are lazier, but when considering whether or not to hire some one I feel like if they smoke or not, is worth mentioning. I suppose it shouldn’t be THE reason deciding factor.

Also there is the FACT that you have to be a bit stupid to be a smoker in the first place. Only an idiot would light some poison on fire and inhale that smoke, for fun.

HFV has no HFV. But somehow has 2 motorcycles > DeLM 04/16/2016 at 00:07

0

I didn’t even bother reading the article, this was just based on my experience