Humana wants to encourage healthy living by employees, won't hire some people with unhealthy habits

[The Straight Story]

Humana Aims To Phase Out Hiring Of Smokers, Where Permitted


Health insurer Humana Inc. (HUM) intends to phase out the hiring of smokers, where legally permitted--a move in keeping with its message that employers should encourage healthy behavior among workers.

The Louisville, K.Y. company already has a policy of not hiring smokers in southwestern Ohio, except for those who commit to stopping the habit. Humana plans to announce soon it won't hire any smokers in another state, Chief Executive Michael McCallister said, and it eventually plans to extend the practice nationally.

"We want to begin a long transition to an environment where it's not something people do," he said in ...

http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20110512-716619.html

Bet the ceo drinks. Let he who is without sin cast the first stone, etc.

[MindPilot]

1. for those of us who do not wish to participate in this Christian clean-living goodie-two-shoes BS

A hearty fuck you! to Humana.

[The Straight Story]

2. Sadly, some are against your body, your choice and will applaud this move

Because they choice as leading to sin and want to help make us natives less savage and more pure....

[tsuki]

6. I opposed the drug testing of employees when I was an employer.

I saw it as a slippery slope. Next will be weight, I think.

[hobbit709]

3. Wonder how healthy the CEO's lifestyle is is.

After all, all that fancy living isn't good for your heart.

[LiberalLoner]

4. I have mixed feelings about "social engineering" like this.

On the one hand, having a healthy population is a good thing. Having fewer drunk drivers is a good thing. Having fewer lives lost to alcoholism and drug abuse is a good thing. And I wouldn't shed one tear if smoking became something that was so passe that young people growing up never picked up a cigarette or other forms of tobacco again.

But this coercion of, "be this or that or you don't get a job" is a real slippery slope. I see danger signs in this. What if it ends up being, "we've done the analysis of your DNA, and I'm sorry, but this shows you have the gene that means you are susceptible to breast cancer (or alzheimers, or what-have-you) and we just can't hire you. You don't promote the healthy image we require for our employees."

Now that's an extreme example of what it could devolve in to, but I'm sure most of us could imagine someone being fired because "I saw XXXX drinking a beer at a sports bar last week on Friday night..."

I do think companies have the right to have standards for hiring and employment. I understand that. But this just raises some warning flags to me.

[Turbineguy]

5. +1

[tsuki]

7. I have a feeling that the next will be weight. If you are 20 lbs overweight,

you will not be hired, or if you are an employee, you will be given time to lose it.