See other Dead Constitution Articles
Title: Fla. Companies Forbidding Smoking In Private Lives
Source:
www.local6.com
URL Source: http://www.local6.com/news/14537611/detail.html
Published: Nov 10, 2007
Author: staff
Post Date: 2007-11-10 09:46:08 by Ferret Mike
Keywords: None
Views: 634
Comments: 16
ORLANDO, Fla. -- A growing number of companies in Florida are forbidding their workers from smoking not only at work, but also in their private lives. Westgate Resorts, the largest private employer in Central Florida, has banned smoking and won't budge from a policy of not hiring smokers and firing employees who do smoke. "When I found out it was legal to discriminate against smokers, I put the policy in place," Westgate president and CEO David Seigel said. Seigel told Local 6 that the policy was prompted by the death of his close friend -- a heavy smoker who died of cancer. "If you are too stupid to understand that smoking is going to kill you, then we are going to tell you that if you want to work for our company, you will not smoke," Seigel said. Central Floridian Ava Bryant said she was called by a recruiter for Westgate and told not to come in for an interview because Westgate won't hire smokers. "I call it discrimination," Bryant said. "I'm not an avid smoker or a constant smoker. I just said I smoke. Sometimes I may pick up a cigarette and smoke." But Local 6 reporter Steven Cooper reported that at Westgate, "sometimes" is one time too many. Seigel said his policy is cost effective and said since it went into effect, health insurance claims have gone down significantly -- making insurance more affordable for employees. The concern for privacy groups is that policies could extend beyond health issues. "Why should non-smokers sympathize with you?" Cooper asked Bryant. "Because, then if it's not for the smoking, it may be something else that may infringe on their rights," Bryant said. "So, how far are you going to go with it? Like, you wear pants so we are not going to hire you because you wear pants?" "Anything we can do that is legal and not discriminatory, we will do," Seigel said. "If you are an alcoholic and we have the right to fire you, we will do so. And if you are obese and there is a way for us not to hire you or to fire you, we will do that, too." "That sounds like discrimination," Cooper said. "Well, I'm saying that anything that is not discriminatory," Seigel said. "If it is, we can't do very much about it." Local 6 videotaped several Westgate employees leaving his building and smoking in a nearby strip mall. Seigel said if those smokers are found out, they will be disciplined and assisted to quit smoking. Seigel said when the non-smoking policy initially went into effect he gave employees a year to stop smoking and opportunities to receive counseling, patches and other smoking cessation programs.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Ferret Mike (#0)
"Yeah" ... take that you polluting freaks !!!
"The mighty are only mighty because we are on our knees. Let us rise!" --Camille Desmoulins
This county is in a really fascist mindset. I know that here in Oregon for example, Children's Service Division - who's agents get incentives for every child they turn over to another home - will take children away from their parents of people turn them in as cannabis smokers if they do not go through treatment and pass piss tests. Tests they give, and do not allow impartial testing to verify results, announcing the test results sometimes two weeks after it was done to make even trying to do so impossible. Some companies give piss tests for nicotine and fire those who flunk it. I do not smoke cigarettes, but I know this is an unjustice, and unwarranted intrusion into people's private lives.
"Put down that unpastuerized milk or we'll blow your brains out - it's for your own good."
" Junk is the ideal product... the ultimate merchandise. No sales talk necessary. The client will crawl through a sewer and beg to buy." - William S Burroughs
This is bullshit..it IS discriminatory.. BUT still it's legal.. stupid bastard.
Maybe we should go back to a time in which men who got divorced could kiss promotions goodbye, and women were called "divorcees" -- oh, the horror! and how tongues clucked! If that was the norm for upper management, I'd go along with not hiring smokers.
Fortune favors the prepared mind. A zombie, however, prefers it raw.
I'd be interested in seeing figures on the actual savings for each employee. if claims really have gone down, I'd be surprised if it was the employees who benefitted financially.
IF these are private companies, then they have every right to hire and fire whomever they want. It's when government forces a private company to do or not do something that it becomes discriminatory. Government, for example, should not force restaurants and bars to be non-smoking establishments. If a private business owner wants to serve only pink cigar smoking pygmies, that should be his choice and prerogative.
A rather pathetic business plan, but if that's what dude wants to do, you are 100% correct that he should be allowed to press on with it absent ANY gov involvement or regulation.
On this I disagree to a point.. if there are laws on the books regarding discrimination which there are then those laws should be applied equally .. what we are dealing with is fascism.. similar to what it was in Spain under Franco.. there are no protection now for workers.. it is corporate rule.
The point is that we do have regulations.. and they're not being applied evenly.. this isnt about the owner of the company having freedom it's about workers not having protection under the law that is on the books .. they can hire illegals without fear of any legal action but they can discriminate against people who smoke and are overweight? WTF is that?
I do not agree. Discrimination like this should not be tolerated. In any situation where an employer demands a urine, blood or hair sample to test for drugs of any kind id illegal search and seizure and is banned by the U.S. Constitution. The Supremes ruled otherwise in the Raygun era, but they were wrong, and servicing the needs of fascism, not protecting the rights of 'We the People.'
corprafascism ping
Fox News Channel is the television version of Free Republic
'Selective enforcement' is what pops to mind - like our immigration laws, for example. Hell, I don't know.
Hell, I don't know. I understand where you're coming from re this issue but as it stands now.. this is just another example of corporate fascism
How well would it have gone if dude had said, "No blacks, Mexicans, pot smokers, people who wear white socks, or people with IQ's under 130?" effing crazy, imo.
"If you are too stupid to understand that smoking is going to kill you, then we are going to tell you
#2. To: noone222 (#1)
#3. To: Ferret Mike (#2)
#4. To: Ferret Mike (#0)
#5. To: Ferret Mike (#0)
"Anything we can do that is legal and not discriminatory, we will do," Seigel said. "If you are an alcoholic and we have the right to fire you, we will do so. And if you are obese and there is a way for us not to hire you or to fire you, we will do that, too."
#6. To: Ferret Mike (#0)
#7. To: Ferret Mike (#0)
Seigel said his policy is cost effective and said since it went into effect, health insurance claims have gone down significantly -- making insurance more affordable for employees.
#8. To: Ferret Mike (#0)
#9. To: christine. freedom lovers (#8)
If a private business owner wants to serve only pink cigar smoking pygmies, that should be his choice and prerogative.
#10. To: christine (#8)
IF these are private companies, then they have every right to hire and fire whomever they want. It's when government forces a private company to do or not do something that it becomes discriminatory. Government, for example, should not force restaurants and bars to be non-smoking establishments. If a private business owner wants to serve only pink cigar smoking pygmies, that should be his choice and prerogative.
#11. To: lodwick (#9)
(Edited)
you are 100% correct that he should be allowed to press on with it absent ANY gov involvement or regulation.
#12. To: christine (#8)
(Edited)
"IF these are private companies, then they have every right to hire and fire whomever they want. It's when government forces a private company to do or not do something that it becomes discriminatory. Government, for example, should not force restaurants and bars to be non-smoking establishments. If a private business owner wants to serve only pink cigar smoking pygmies, that should be his choice and prerogative."
#13. To: Ferret Mike, *libertarians* (#0)
"When I found out it was legal to discriminate against smokers, I put the policy in place," Westgate president and CEO David Seigel said.
#14. To: Zipporah (#11)
WTF is that?
#15. To: lodwick (#14)
'Selective enforcement' is what pops to mind - like our immigration laws, for example.
#16. To: Zipporah (#15)
I understand where you're coming from re this issue but as it stands now.. this is just another example of corporate fascism.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest