Naples (FL) council hears proposal to ban hiring smokers

[The Straight Story]

Naples council hears proposal to ban hiring smokers

NAPLES — Want to apply for a job with the city of Naples?

Soon you may have to stub out your cigarette before sending in your application.

A ban on hiring smokers was one proposal considered by the Naples City Council on Monday during a discussion about possible changes to employee health benefits.

The proposed changes, which council is expected to discuss further during budget discussions in the fall, include changes to copays, out-of-network deductibles and prescription costs. But perhaps the biggest change could be the recommendation to institute a hiring ban on smokers.

That recommendation could reduce health care costs in the longer term, increase productivity and decrease absenteeism, the city’s risk manager Lori Parsons said in a memo to council. The suggestion to adopt a hiring ban on smokers could be done instead of instituting a smoker premium differential, she wrote.

http://www.naplesnews.com/news/2009/may/18/naples-council-proposes-ban-hiring-smokers/

[devilgrrl]

1. What horseshit!

eom

[The Straight Story]

4. I am sure the many anti-choice people will be happy (nt)

[aquart]

2. Sweet revenge.

[RoyGBiv]

3. Bookmark

:popcorn:

For later ...

[Papa Boule]

5. If they only hire teetotalers too n/t

[DrDan]

11. why - a glass or two of wine a day has been shown to improve health

[dmallind]

14. Hmm lemme count the differences....

Drinkers don't take drink breaks many times a day during work (if they do they are beyond mere drinkers and should not be hired either!)

Smoking kills four times as many people, but is engaged in by about 20% of the adult population. About 70% of the adult population drinks. So more than three times as many drinkers at least, and 1/4 the fatalities. Pretty divergent damage rate there.

Never seen a broad group-based insurance plan that charges more for drinkers. Have for smokers. Actuaries are not idiots.

Drinkers tend not to make visitors to the workplace run a gamut of empty bottles and beer breath. If they do, see the parenthetical statement in point one.

Whatever spluttering claims about drunk driving and alcohol-fueled crime come in retort (even if they are accurate, which would be a first), ignore the basic point. Damage to both self and others is an unavoidable part and parcel of smoking. Driving drunk and beating up strangers in parking lots is not a sine qua non of drinking.

[bunnies]

6. No one cares now.

Because smokers are the easiest group to discriminate against. Just wait 'till they ban hiring fat people. Overweight? You're next!!!

[EFerrari]

15. They'd never have hired these people.

Not to mention, this guy. :)

[bunnies]

17. Well. Clearly those people are sub-par.

They *do* smoke after all.

:sarcasm:

[The Straight Story]

19. ROFL

That reply deserves a thread of it's own :)

[EFerrari]

7. In a funny way, I thank all the control freaks and the insurance companies

that made corporate and bureaucratic jobs too awful to do everyday. I'd never have done what I really like if they'd made it easier for me to stand an 8 hour day with them. :)

[texastoast]

8. So are they going to ban McDonald's consumers too?

You know, the two-all-beef-patties addicts?

[DrDan]

9. Great idea!

"That recommendation could reduce health care costs in the longer term, increase productivity and decrease absenteeism"

sounds like a reasonable goal for any hiring institution.

[bigwillq]

10. You don't get more discriminatory than this.

:mad:

[pleah]

12. I love the smell of a lawsuit in the morning.

I wonder if the heat in Florida is getting to those people?

[SoCalNative]

16. Other companies in Florida are already doing this

smokers are not a protected class

http://www.clickorlando.com/money/14537611/detail.html

[Texasgal]

13. Today must be smoke day on DU.

:popcorn:

[CBR]

18. This is absurd. nt