This post originated from an RSS feed registered with .NET Buzz
by Sean McCormack.
Original Post: If you smoke (even at home), you're fired
Feed Title: Vini Vidi Vici - Sean McCormack's Blog
Feed URL: http://smccormack.blogs.com/adapdev/SyndicationService.asmx/GetRss
Feed Description: Sean McCormack's Blog, focusing on various aspects of .NET development, open source projects, recommended books and tools
I heard this on the news yesterday. Pretty interesting (Via MSNBC):
LANSING, Mich. - 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.
From a business stand-point it seems reasonable. Smoking causes health issues,
which the company is paying for. Health care costs are rising, so it only makes
sense to ban smoking so that they don't have to pay so much. Makes sense...right??...
The fundamental issue isn't this specific case (although I'm sure the smokers out
there are up in arms)...to me the bigger issue is the underlying philosophy.
Companies can dictate what you do in your freetime if it impacts health-care costs?
Whoa. Does that mean that a company can ban me from drinking? How about
snow-boarding? What about going to restaurants where there's smoke? What
about boxing? What if I have a wife that yells at me a lot (raises blood pressure)?
Pretty scary if you ask me. For the time being, it seems small, but the long-term
implications, if it isn't challenged, could be serious. No fear though...I'm
sure they'll have a law suite on their hands shortly...
Previous Topic
