February 1, 2005 7:24 AM

How long before those with high blood pressure are filing for unemployment benefits?

Company Fires All Employees Who Smoke: Michigan Firm Won’t Allow Smoking, Even On Employee’s Own Time

1984: Fired for being a smoker

Steve at Ravenwood’s Universe and I seldom agree on anything, though I do respect his opinions. Now and again, though, we find ourselves more or less on the same side of an argument. Yeah, it’s somewhere akin to matter and anti-matter getting together for a family reunion, but never let it be said that I am a dogmatic Leftie. Committed, perhaps, but not dogmatic.

Steve relays the story of a company that fired four employees for refusing to take a test to determine if they smoke cigarettes. Now, allow me to qualify my disdain for this reprehensible behavior by stating for the record that I HATE CIGARETTES. If there is anyone out there with a greater hatred for tobacco and tobacco products, I’d sure like to meet them. Anyone who has spent an afternoon locked in an overheated building with 50 chain-smoking Kosovars will be able to vouch for me.

Of course, having qualified my bona fides, I also have to state that I cannot abide the idea of an employer attempting to exercise such an intense degree of control over how their employees lead their lives outside of the workplace. Were this sort of thing to become the accepted norm, it would be an exeedingly slippery slope. Where would this sort of egregious oppression stop? Or would it? How long until employers attempt to weed out those who drink heavily? Have high cholesterol? Skydive? Refuse to eat their veggies? Vote Democratic? Root for the Green Bay Packers?

OK, so it’s an easy thing to ridicule, but think about it for a moment. Where DOES the line get drawn? If an employer can exercise such a high degree of control over the non-work activities of their employees, weeding our smokers really could be only the beginning. Once employers are allowed to begin sliding down this slippery slope, who is going to be there to stop it?

Yes, employers clearly have a vested interest in controlling health care costs, but does that give them the right to exercise control over the non-work activities and behaviors engaged in by their employees? Steve even provides some suggestions about some of the additional strictures that “well-meaning” employers also might want to consider put into effect:

No skydiving, water-skiing, motorcycling, hang gliding, or bungee jumping.

No reading or watching TV in the dark.

No going to loud rock concerts.

No running with scissors.

No burning candles after 9 PM.

Employee’s homes must be properly equipped with bath mats.

No electrical outlets without a safety cover.

Employees must always use the handrail on the stairs.

Employees must wash hands, regardless of whether or not they are returning to work.

No frayed extension cords.

No answering the door without knowing who it is.

No talking to strangers.

Oh, yeah, and I would add that employees must also wait for an hour after eating before they go swimming….

Yes, it’s silly, and yes, it’s easy to laugh at, but is it out of the realm of possibiliy? Not hardly…and it could be coming to your workplace.

blog comments powered by Disqus

Technorati

Technorati search

» Blogs that link here

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Jack Cluth published on February 1, 2005 7:24 AM.

And the award for "What I want to be when I grow up" goes to.... was the previous entry in this blog.

My sentiments, exactly.... is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

Contact Me

Powered by Movable Type 5.12