Washington State - No butts about it: Franciscan Health to refuse jobs to smokers

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • CoderGuy
    Member
    • Jul 2009
    • 2679

    #1

    Washington State - No butts about it: Franciscan Health to refuse jobs to smokers

    It has started here.


    SEATTLE -- Want the job? Kick the habit.

    That's the word from one of the largest private employers in Western Washington.

    Franciscan Health System, which employs 8,100 people in three counties, said Thursday it is implementing a nicotine-free hiring policy starting March 1.

    "We are an organization that's all about creating healthier communities, and so we are going to walk the talk, " said Dr. Cliff Robertson, Franciscan's chief operating officer. "We're going to stand up and lead as health care providers and say, 'We shouldn't be smoking.'"

    The news stunned Spanaway resident Eric Williams, a Bates Technical College graduate currently looking for work. Unemployed for two years and desperately in need of a job, Williams was partially through a job application with Franciscan Thursday when he suddenly stopped.

    "I came across question number six that said, 'If you have nicotine in your system as of March 1, you will not be considered for employment at that company,'" said Williams, a smoker. "Cigarettes are legal, so why are we getting tested for nicotine when there's, like, a lot of other things we could be testing for?"

    That's the same question posed by Lindsay Halm, a Seattle employment law attorney.

    "Where does it stop? If an employer is allowed to screen applicants based on a legal activity like smoking, what's next?" Halm asked. "There are many things that we do that aren't necessarily the most healthy choices, but are nevertheless private decisions that we make at home, on the weekends, at night."

    Halm pointed out that many American leaders in history - scientist Albert Einstein and President Barack Obama, for example - would be excluded from certain jobs under these regulations.

    "My concern is the slippery slope," she added. "If it's regulating smoking, where does it end? What if you have fast food for lunch? Can your employer tell you you're no longer allowed to eat that food because it's bad for you?"

    "A big difference is that you can choose to smoke but we all have to eat to live," Robertson countered. "Although there is a growing body of evidence that being overweight is hazardous to your health, it's nowhere near as conclusive as the data around smoking.

    "While it is their right and we fully respect and acknowledge that, we believe that decisions have consequences, so when someone chooses to smoke, the consequence of that decision is they are negatively impacting their health."

    The nicotine-free hiring policy, health advocates say, represents a growing trend among employers around the country, especially health care centers.

    Franciscan - whose facilities include St. Joseph Medical Center in Tacoma, St. Francis Hospital in Federal Way, and St. Anthony Hospital in Gig Harbor - is the first member of the Washington State Hospital Association to require job applicants to be nicotine-free.

    While a positive test for nicotine will eliminate candidates from consideration, Robertson said, they will be able to reapply in six months. Current employees who smoke will be grandfathered in under the old policy, and will not have to undergo nicotine screening.

    Williams, who smokes about five cigarettes a day, says he is discouraged by Franciscan's new hiring policy but will continue to apply for jobs.

    "I'm a hard worker," he said. "Really, I'm a hard worker."

    "If I'm a viable candidate for the position, I should not be denied, you know, the right to be employed because I smoke."
    http://www.komonews.com/news/local/115844769.html
  • muddyfunkstar
    Member
    • Aug 2010
    • 967

    #2
    That's outrageous.

    Comment

    • SmokedEuro
      Member
      • Aug 2010
      • 280

      #3
      How is this legal? Arent discrimination laws supposed to prevent this kind of stuff.

      Comment

      • lxskllr
        Member
        • Sep 2007
        • 13435

        #4
        Originally posted by SmokedEuro View Post
        How is this legal? Arent discrimination laws supposed to prevent this kind of stuff.
        Only if you're "extra" special. You can define "extra" as being female, or non-white. If you aren't "extra" special, you can **** yourself :^S

        Comment

        • GoVegan
          Member
          • Oct 2009
          • 5603

          #5
          Originally posted by SmokedEuro View Post
          How is this legal? Arent discrimination laws supposed to prevent this kind of stuff.
          Yes, they do against race, color, creed, national origin, religion, political identification, marital sex, sex, disability, age and in some states sexual orientation but nothing pertaining to tobacco users.

          Comment

          • CoderGuy
            Member
            • Jul 2009
            • 2679

            #6
            The thing that's so ignorant about all this is with the harm reduction factor of Swedish snus you would think everyone would be pushing smokers to switch.

            Comment

            • snusgetter
              Member
              • May 2010
              • 10903

              #7
              Massachusetts in the forefront??

              ~
              December 19, 2010

              Smokers need not apply

              Warning: Cigarette smoking may be hazardous to your career.

              Anna Jaques Hospital joins growing number of employers refusing to hire smokers

              Under a new policy believed to be the first of its kind for a hospital in Massachusetts, Anna Jaques Hospital in Newburyport last month began testing prospective employees for nicotine use. Those who fail the screening can forget about a job. The rejected candidates are told to reapply in six months — if they’ve quit puffing by then. “

              As a health care facility, we believe it’s our right to say we don’t want any smoke in our building or on our employees,’’ said Deb Chiaravalloti, spokeswoman for Anna Jaques. “We are taking a stand, saying that if you smoke you cannot work here because we are promoting good health. We want to have as healthy an environment as we can for our employees and patients.’’

              MORE




              Y'all have no idea how high we stack bullshit in the Bay State!!
              John Quincy Adams, et alia, would no longer recognize the place they fought so hard to build.

              Comment

              • CoderGuy
                Member
                • Jul 2009
                • 2679

                #8
                Well MA has higher taxes than WA. It's what WA aspires to be. If I wasn't underwater on my home I would leave this POS state and move somewhere like Texas.

                Comment

                • Snusdog
                  Member
                  • Jun 2008
                  • 6752

                  #9
                  I love the slight of hand that ALWAYS occurs in policies and articles like the one above.

                  Smoking's bad........smoking's bad........smoking's bad........smoking's bad........smoking's bad........smoking's bad........smoking's bad........smoking's bad........

                  Therefore, no nicotine whatsoever

                  "A big difference is that you can choose to smoke but we all have to eat to live," Robertson countered. "Although there is a growing body of evidence that being overweight is hazardous to your health, it's nowhere near as conclusive as the data around smoking.

                  Mr. S Dog one of the best looking and well hung snusers in the international snus community then asked

                  "Dr. Robertson while the data around smoking is certainly overwhelming, the data concerning nicotine is not. In fact, the data concerning nicotine suggests that it is no more harmful than caffeine. However, you have not simply banned smoking you have banned nicotine across the board.

                  Supposing for a moment that we all agreed with you about smoking, what research are you prepared to offer to justify your decision to extend this ban to nicotine in general? Also, how would you respond to the allegation that your decision to ban nicotine under the pretense of smoking is disingenuous and politically motivated?"
                  When it's my time to go, I want to die peacefully in my sleep, like my uncle did....... Not screaming in terror like his passengers

                  Comment

                  • GoVegan
                    Member
                    • Oct 2009
                    • 5603

                    #10
                    Originally posted by CoderGuy
                    The thing that's so ignorant about all this is with the harm reduction factor of Swedish snus you would think everyone would be pushing smokers to switch.
                    Yeah for that to happen people would actually need to spend a few minutes to learn the details of harm reduction and the actual impact of snus use on health. Just like politics, people are going to support whatever their impulse and 20 seconds of knowledge tell them to support. Could you imagine what we could accomplish if people actually took the time to learn details and read the fine print?

                    Comment

                    • lxskllr
                      Member
                      • Sep 2007
                      • 13435

                      #11
                      Originally posted by CoderGuy
                      The thing that's so ignorant about all this is with the harm reduction factor of Swedish snus you would think everyone would be pushing smokers to switch.
                      That would only be true if they really cared about you. The fact is, it's religious zealotry, of the same sort as the Crusades, and the Inquisition. Facts don't matter to ideological zealot, and honestly there isn't anything you can do to support your position; they just don't care.

                      Fighting bullshit with bullshit might be the way to handle it. Start the National Church of Tobacco, which MANDATES that all members partake of the weed. They can't discriminate based on religion, right? ;^)

                      Comment

                      • GoVegan
                        Member
                        • Oct 2009
                        • 5603

                        #12
                        Originally posted by lxskllr View Post
                        That would only be true if they really cared about you. The fact is, it's religious zealotry, of the same sort as the Crusades, and the Inquisition. Facts don't matter to ideological zealot, and honestly there isn't anything you can do to support your position; they just don't care.

                        Fighting bullshit with bullshit might be the way to handle it. Start the National Church of Tobacco, which MANDATES that all members partake of the weed. They can't discriminate based on religion, right? ;^)
                        Father lxskllr?

                        Comment

                        • CoderGuy
                          Member
                          • Jul 2009
                          • 2679

                          #13
                          Originally posted by lxskllr View Post
                          That would only be true if they really cared about you. The fact is, it's religious zealotry, of the same sort as the Crusades, and the Inquisition. Facts don't matter to ideological zealot, and honestly there isn't anything you can do to support your position; they just don't care.

                          Fighting bullshit with bullshit might be the way to handle it. Start the National Church of Tobacco, which MANDATES that all members partake of the weed. They can't discriminate based on religion, right? ;^)
                          Exactly! I was ranting about the anti's even before PACT when everyone was still saying, "Na, that will never pass"

                          Comment

                          • lxskllr
                            Member
                            • Sep 2007
                            • 13435

                            #14
                            Originally posted by GoVegan View Post
                            Father lxskllr?
                            I think it would take someone with better oratory skills. I'd be better handling technical details. A website with a weekly sermon would be a good start, and a guest sacrament leader every week. Everything from cigarettes to snus. Those that can't come to the church in person, can participate online to give praise and glory to the holy Nicotiana :^)

                            Comment

                            • Snus Boost
                              Member
                              • Jan 2011
                              • 640

                              #15
                              Originally posted by snusgetter
                              ~
                              December 19, 2010

                              Smokers need not apply

                              Warning: Cigarette smoking may be hazardous to your career.

                              Anna Jaques Hospital joins growing number of employers refusing to hire smokers

                              Under a new policy believed to be the first of its kind for a hospital in Massachusetts, Anna Jaques Hospital in Newburyport last month began testing prospective employees for nicotine use. Those who fail the screening can forget about a job. The rejected candidates are told to reapply in six months — if they’ve quit puffing by then.

                              As a health care facility, we believe it’s our right to say we don’t want any smoke in our building or on our employees,’’ said Deb Chiaravalloti, spokeswoman for Anna Jaques. “We are taking a stand, saying that if you smoke you cannot work here because we are promoting good health. We want to have as healthy an environment as we can for our employees and patients.’’

                              MORE




                              Y'all have no idea how high we stack bullshit in the Bay State!!
                              John Quincy Adams, et alia, would no longer recognize the place they fought so hard to build.
                              Just ban smoking on facility grounds if that is your concern. What is going on in this country. It's not just this there are a lot of things going on that make me say WAKE UP THIS IS SUPPOSED TO BE THE LAND OF THE FREE. We are all just taking all of this lying down WTF

                              Comment

                              Related Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X