|
|
|
|
Share/Bookmark this Topic:
|
| Message |
Author |
by Strager
on Tue Jan 02, 2007 6:51 pm |
|
Hey All,
First time poster here. So i'm living in California, land of the unfree.... anyway, i'm online looking for a job today and the following is posted in a job search:
Quote: Gavin de Becker & Associates is a nicotine-free workforce. Candidates are required participate in pre-employment drug and nicotine screening and an extensive background check.
Is this legal? If so it's outragous. That is pure, in your face descrimination. Already i'm made to feel like a second class citizen because I smoke, and now i'm reading it's legal to deny me a job AS A COMPUTER TECH for it?
Let me know what you guys think...
-S |
|
|
Strager
Newbie
Joined: Jan 01, 2007
Posts: 2
|
| |
Back to top |
|
|
| |
|
by Torquemeda
on Tue Jan 02, 2007 7:11 pm |
|
Most states it isn't legal. I'm not sure about KKKalifornia, though. Got a link to this job posting?
Oh and welcome to the form.
Michigan is one state that I know of where it is legal. |
|
|
Torquemeda
Smoking Lobby Sponsor
Joined: May 23, 2005
Posts: 1089
|
| |
Back to top |
| |
|
by Strager
on Tue Jan 02, 2007 7:14 pm |
|
Torquemeda wrote: Most states it isn't legal. I'm not sure about KKKalifornia, though. Got a link to this job posting?
Oh and welcome to the form.
Michigan is one state that I know of where it is legal.
That is so rediculus. The worst of it is we are powerless to do anything about it.
The link to the post is:http://jobsearch.monster.com/getjob.asp?JobID=50991750&AVSDM=2006%2D11%2D30+13%3A03%3A23&Logo=1&JobTitle=Entry%2DLevel+IT+Su%2E%2E%2E&sort=rv&vw=b&cy=US&brd=1,128,1862,1863&JSYESREG=1&JSNONREG=1&lid=882&lid=348&lid=350&q=technical%20support&salmin=30000&salmax=49999&SRID=3&refine=1&dcjvlid=348
I didnt want to post it before 'cause I didnt know if it was against the rules.
-S |
|
|
Strager
Newbie
Joined: Jan 01, 2007
Posts: 2
|
| |
Back to top |
| |
|
by Mo2
on Tue Jan 02, 2007 7:44 pm |
|
Welcome to the best lobby anywhere.
I have seen similar want ads here in Ohio, post-smoking ban. So I went to the library, got a couple of employment law books and here's what I found.
Employers can't discriminate against individuals in the hiring process just because those individuals' health care costs might hurt the company's bottom line. The case that was in the book involved Americans with AIDS who back in the late 80s/early 90s were not being hired even though they were qualified.
I don't know which federal court it was, but it was a federal court which ruled that employers had to hire qualified individuals whose healthcare was "expensive" to the company. Employees must be given the option of paying more each month for healthcare; using a combo of two or three healthcare plans or opting out completely from the employer's health coverage.
So go to a library in California, get a federal employment law book. Read it for yourself. Talk to other smokers in CA and find a lawyer with gonads.  |
|
|
Mo2
Smoker
Joined: Dec 11, 2006
Posts: 159
Location: OH-the hell hole state
|
| |
Back to top |
| |
|
by JoshNJ
on Wed Jan 03, 2007 9:09 am |
|
Strager wrote: Is this legal? If so it's outragous. That is pure, in your face descrimination. Already i'm made to feel like a second class citizen because I smoke, and now i'm reading it's legal to deny me a job AS A COMPUTER TECH for it?
Let me know what you guys think...
-S
Here's some literature that might give you more insight into this evolving area of employment regulation:
Smoke-free Workforce Policies
Monitoring Employees' Off-Duty Conduct
And a case that you might be interested in reading about this Massachusetts case:
Off-the-job smoker sues over firing
However, let me answer your question on point with the following extract:
Quote: My company has announced that it is going to fire anyone who is a smoker, after strictly enforcing an anti-smoking policy at work for several years. Can I be fired for smoking on the evenings and weekends, even if I have never violated their policy at work?
A new trend is increasingly taking hold, where companies looking to reduce their health care costs have established not just a "no smoking" policy, but a "no smokers" policy. These companies not only refuse to hire smokers, but some are even taking the drastic step of terminating current employees who smoke. Whether your company can do this depends on where you live.
Twenty-nine states and the District of Columbia have laws which make it illegal for a company to fire or otherwise discriminate against an employee who smokes, while in the rest of the states, employers are free to discriminate against smokers. If you are subject to a policy banning smoking, you may want to consult with a local attorney to determine whether the policy appears to violate any laws.
Most of the companies implementing anti-smoking policies are giving their employees time to quit, and are supporting their efforts by sponsoring programs and paying for aids to quit smoking, such as medication, nicotine gum, and patches. If you value your job and truly want to quit smoking, you may want to take advantage of these additional incentives, or you may want to look for a new job without such restrictive policies.
Actually, it's now 30 states and DC that have these laws. You can see a full list of these states and their applicable statutes here:
http://slati.lungusa.org/appendixf.asp
Since you live in California, your applicable statutes are CA LABOR CODE §96(k) and if you are an applicant for a job, it's §98.6.
So here's the tricky part... These laws are not open and shut answers to the question of whether you can sue an employer for regulating your lawful conduct outside the office. But the existence of them helps protect you and so employers should be aware of them if they want to start regulating conduct outside of work. Without any law like this, such as the Massachusetts case cited above, the employee will have little or no chance for redemption. |
|
|
JoshNJ
Enthusiastic Smoker
Joined: Apr 12, 2006
Posts: 312
|
| |
Back to top |
| |
|
by cricket
on Wed Jan 03, 2007 6:07 pm |
|
Okay, I read some of the links posted above.
Now I am TOTALLY freaking out.
I'm getting mad - REAL MAD |
|
|
cricket
Toker
Joined: Apr 29, 2006
Posts: 109
|
| |
Back to top |
| |
|
by CigarBoy
on Wed Jan 03, 2007 8:02 pm |
|
I think you can discrinminate against smokers because they are not a protected class like Blacks, women, homos, old people etc.
I think AIDS has been given civil rights in a lot of states, so they are probably protected.
I guess I should ask the CB Legal Counsel. |
|
|
CigarBoy
Enthusiastic Smoker
Joined: Dec 09, 2006
Posts: 236
Location: Cincinnati, OH
|
| |
Back to top |
| |
|
by Mo2
on Wed Jan 03, 2007 10:59 pm |
|
CigarBoy wrote: I think you can discrinminate against smokers because they are not a protected class like Blacks, women, homos, old people etc.
I think AIDS has been given civil rights in a lot of states, so they are probably protected.
I guess I should ask the CB Legal Counsel.
Is that because you can't think by yourself? Can't reach a conclusion on your own? |
|
|
Mo2
Smoker
Joined: Dec 11, 2006
Posts: 159
Location: OH-the hell hole state
|
| |
Back to top |
| |
|
by Darkseid
on Wed Jan 03, 2007 11:14 pm |
|
|
|
Darkseid
Smoking Lobby Sponsor
Joined: Jun 13, 2006
Posts: 1513
Location: Peoples Republik of oHEILo
|
| |
Back to top |
| |
|
by JEEP_GOD
on Wed Jan 03, 2007 11:20 pm |
|
Yeah, I've never seen such spasmodic attack posts since JRS left.
Fucking weird. Bad mojo.
I like your new avatar, Dark.
I wish I had one of those, so I could leave this fucking Bizarr0-World, and seek kinder accomodations somewhere else.
Like the moon. |
|
|
JEEP_GOD
Smoking Lobby Sponsor
Joined: Jul 08, 2006
Posts: 1003
Location: Welcome to camp smoke free!!!
|
| |
Back to top |
| |
|
|
