how about targeting fat fucks instead? fat fucks cost more than smokers do

[Buddy_Christ]

http://wireservice.wired.com/wired/story.asp?section=Breaking&storyId=980089&tw=wn_wire_story

Company Fires Employees for Smoking Test

Monday, January 24, 2005 5:48 p.m. ET

LANSING, Mich. (AP) -- Four employees of a health care company have been fired for refusing to take a test to determine whether they smoke cigarettes.

Weyco Inc., a health benefits administrator based in Okemos, Mich., adopted a policy Jan. 1 that allows employees to be fired if they smoke, even if the smoking happens after business hours or at home.

Company founder Howard Weyers has said the anti-smoking rule was designed to shield the firm from high health care costs. "I don't want to pay for the results of smoking," he said.

The rule led one employee to quit before the policy was adopted. Four others were fired when they balked at the smoking test.

Chief Financial Officer Gary Climes estimated that 18 to 20 of the company's 200 employers were smokers when the policy was announced in 2003. Of those, as many as 14 quit smoking before the policy went into effect. The company offered them help to kick the habit.

"That is absolutely a victory," Climes said.

or better yet, how about not hriing anyone that doesn't maintain perfect health through a well balanced diet and proper exercise.

wait, this is even better....only hire people that maintain perfect health through diet and exercise, don't smoke, and have blond hair and blue eyes.

Ladies and Gentlemen, welcome to the beginning of the 4th Reich.

 

[bluepeter]

That violates so many rights I'm not sure where to begin. Let the lawsuits commence.

 

[The Shadow]

hmm.....you cant fire folks for off the clock shenanagins

 

[hamstershaver]

hmm.....you cant fire folks for off the clock shenanagins

depends on what it is

 

[jenscats5]

hmm.....you cant fire folks for off the clock shenanagins

Here in DE, we are an "employment at will" state -- so you can be fired for any reason or no reason at all -- as long as it's not discrimination. But employers can do almost whatever they want.

 

[mrplunkey]

It's an interesting (albeit unethical) play. Under certain circumstances you can fire people for things that aren't directly job-related. Generally, the higher-level the position is the more lattitude you have.

In this case, while it's massively illegal to fire someone for filing a health claim, this guy isn't firing people *with* claims, but he's firing people who smoke under the supposition that they will file a claim in the future.

The company is in healthcare, so I'm sure that will be their reason. If the company were a "stop smoking" company or if it were something like a personal training company they could pull it off easily.

This one might be close!

 

[sawastea]

wait, this is even better....only hire people that maintain perfect health through diet and exercise, don't smoke, and have blond hair and blue eyes.

Hey, that's me!!!

 

[the nature boy]

hmm.....you cant fire folks for off the clock shenanagins

if they do drugs they can.

 

[hamstershaver]

Hey, that's me!!!

they would fire you for being geigh though

 

[rnch]

as much as cig smoking pisses me off (WHY would anyone choose to indulge in a habit that is expensive, socially despised and shortens their life eith every drag?), i could not support this type of human rights violation.