Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-24-2010, 01:50 PM
 
Location: Las Vegas, NV
3,849 posts, read 3,755,505 times
Reputation: 1706

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Memphis1979 View Post
In a private company, the employer has every right to say whatever they'd like about your personal habits.

If, someone wants to fire you for wearing hats, at home, that should be up to the employer.

However, this is a government agency, and I'm not sure it should be done in that environment.
I disagree with the highlighted. If I'm not on company time, in a company uniform or on company property, then my employer has nothing to say about how I spend my time, what I wear or my 'personal habits'.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-24-2010, 01:55 PM
 
Location: Sango, TN
24,868 posts, read 24,410,277 times
Reputation: 8672
Quote:
Originally Posted by MsMcQ LV View Post
I disagree with the highlighted. If I'm not on company time, in a company uniform or on company property, then my employer has nothing to say about how I spend my time, what I wear or my 'personal habits'.
At-will employment is a doctrine of American law that defines an employment relationship in which either party can break the relationship with no liability, provided there was no express contract for a definite term governing the employment relationship and that the employer does not belong to a collective bargain (i.e., has not recognized a union).

This has already been tried in court once, and the employer won.

A guy up north somewhere, wanted all of his employers to quit smoking. Even at home. Three ladies disagreed with it, and they were fired. They filed a lawsuit against their former employer, and he won.

The courts said, that in a at-will employment situation, the employer can fire you for whatever reason they'd like. If they don't like people wearing contact lenses, if they don't like people wearing earings, if they don't like tattoos, all of those are reasons to fire you.

Freedom works in both directions. The ladies didn't have to work for him, they could find a job elsewhere.

The only thing someone can't fire you for, is your sex, your age, or your race. Everything else is on the table.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-24-2010, 02:14 PM
 
Location: Las Vegas, NV
3,849 posts, read 3,755,505 times
Reputation: 1706
Quote:
Originally Posted by Memphis1979 View Post
At-will employment is a doctrine of American law that defines an employment relationship in which either party can break the relationship with no liability, provided there was no express contract for a definite term governing the employment relationship and that the employer does not belong to a collective bargain (i.e., has not recognized a union).

This has already been tried in court once, and the employer won.

A guy up north somewhere, wanted all of his employers to quit smoking. Even at home. Three ladies disagreed with it, and they were fired. They filed a lawsuit against their former employer, and he won.

The courts said, that in a at-will employment situation, the employer can fire you for whatever reason they'd like. If they don't like people wearing contact lenses, if they don't like people wearing earings, if they don't like tattoos, all of those are reasons to fire you.

Freedom works in both directions. The ladies didn't have to work for him, they could find a job elsewhere.

The only thing someone can't fire you for, is your sex, your age, or your race. Everything else is on the table.
That may be "the way it is", but I still don't think it's right in any way.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-24-2010, 02:15 PM
 
Location: Inland Empire, Calif
2,884 posts, read 5,645,213 times
Reputation: 2803
Nothing new here, several So Calif Police departments have done this for years. Geat idea, why pay medical bills for someone who is tying to kill themselves...?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-24-2010, 02:17 PM
 
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
4,472 posts, read 17,708,932 times
Reputation: 4095
Quote:
Nothing new here, several So Calif Police departments have done this for years. Geat idea, why pay medical bills for someone who is tying to kill themselves...?
What people do in the privacy of their home should be NO business of the federal govt's as long as it doesn't break any laws. As a smoker, I'm disgusted at how my privacy is being violated.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-24-2010, 02:35 PM
 
Location: Sango, TN
24,868 posts, read 24,410,277 times
Reputation: 8672
Quote:
Originally Posted by MsMcQ LV View Post
That may be "the way it is", but I still don't think it's right in any way.
And thats your opinion. However, the employer is only working within the law.

As I said before, I'm not sure if the same laws apply to a municipal job, but it might.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-24-2010, 02:46 PM
 
Location: Billings, MT
9,884 posts, read 10,988,727 times
Reputation: 14180
But, EVERYBODY knows that smoking is unhealthy, and drives up the cost of medical insurance!
EVERYBODY knows that second hand smoke is the most dangerous pollutant on the planet!
EVERYBODY knows that smokers are second class citizens.
EVERYBODY knows that smokers have NO "rights".
Therefore, she is just simply doing what she thinks is best for her town.
She doesn't have the intestinal fortitude to outlaw the use, possession, sale, or importation of tobacco into her town, so she is taking this means to attempt to eliminate it without a law.
Just like all the other "antis": "You need to quit smoking, but as long as you are doing it, we will tax it heavily because we need the money, but you best quit, but thank you for continuing so we can get the money!"
Stupid people.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-24-2010, 09:50 PM
 
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
4,472 posts, read 17,708,932 times
Reputation: 4095
Quote:
But, EVERYBODY knows that smoking is unhealthy, and drives up the cost of medical insurance!
EVERYBODY knows that second hand smoke is the most dangerous pollutant on the planet!
EVERYBODY knows that smokers are second class citizens.
EVERYBODY knows that smokers have NO "rights".
Wait wait wait...how can you possibly say that smokers are second class citizens and have no rights??
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-24-2010, 09:53 PM
 
218 posts, read 239,688 times
Reputation: 61
I do believe she is a Republican. So much for less government.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-24-2010, 10:11 PM
 
Location: SARASOTA, FLORIDA
11,486 posts, read 15,321,356 times
Reputation: 4894
If the mayor has proof that smoking is costing the city more money in HC cost because the employers are smoking then he has the right. If those employees are less productive etc.

If you are doing something at home that effects you at work, causes you to miss work, caused you to have issues at work and cost the company money then they have the right to demand this.

It is a proven fact that smokers cost companies tons of money because smokers have so many other health issues related to smoking.

Look up The Longaberger Co in Dresden Ohio. Large self made millionaire business started from scratch. Many years ago they would not hire you if you smoked because they were making handmade from scratch baskets and found that the smokers were less productive and carried the smell of smoke into the work place and then onto the wood splints.

They then would not hire you if you showed nicotine in your blood stream.

All hell was raised about it but in the end the company won because they proved it cost them more money in HC cost, the smokers took more time off of work for sick days and they were less productive.

Two employees at a local Taco Bell one evening were standing outside smoking when we drove into the parking lot. We get out of the van and go inside. One goes to the counter to wait on us and the other goes back to the prep area. My husband asked them, If you are going to serve us food then it would be nice if you washed your hands first dont ya think? The idiot worker said why? The DH responded by telling the fool that smoking is nasty, you are touching your hands to your mouth and you are then touching FOOD that we are going to eat. The workers responded by saying that it is no big deal. The DH YES IT IS, you are serving food and you are should have the decency and cleanliness to wash your hands first.

Both refused to wash their hands. We left the store without ordering and the next day the DH returned to the store to speak with the manager.
Both losers were fired because the manager said it is required of them to wash their hands and they refused when a customer brought it to their attention.

Smoking is a nasty terrible habit that cost us all extra money for someone else's problems and that is not right. Any company or employee needs to have the right to control cost if the employee is doing something like smoking that has been proven to cost more, produce less and miss work because of smoking related illnesses.

My mother is dying of cancer because she was sucking in my fathers cigarette smoke for 40+ years. She breathed second hand smoke from someone who should have never been smoking in the first place. Her health suffered because of his smoking and others second hand smoke.

I watched her health go down hill because of the smoke and know the issues well.

Personally if I still owned my own business I would NOT hire anyone who smoked because it would cost me more money, have a less productive employee and I personally cannot stand the stench on the clothing of smokers.

Now we all get to see the smoking gangs outside of every business standing on the streets and we have to walk through the cancer cloud of smoke.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top