Just a quickie – have to go out for limited boozing and then home for a sleep. Second day of real work tomorrow and I still have to learn all the rules. Can’t ignore them if I don’t know what they are.
View from the Solent dropped an interesting link in the comments on the previous post. Comments below the article speak of Prohibition, but this is not Prohibition.
When alcohol was Prohibited, you could still get some and still drink it. Unless you turned up for work smashed, nobody cared. Nobody was tested. Nobody was required to sign ‘no booze’ declarations and nobody was refused employment just because they liked half a shandy at the weekend.
This time, the city governance has made it illegal for an agency to employ a smoker. If you stop right now, you still cannot get a job for twelve months. Some places go further -
In some more-aggressive environments referred to as nicotine-free, employee urine-samples can be taken and tested for any presence of nicotine, not excluding that from gum or patches. Employees testing positive can be terminated.
The choice of that last word is interesting, is it not?
This is not companies declaring they don’t want smokers. This is official local government declaring that it is now illegal for companies to employ smokers. The companies no longer have a choice. Even if they are run by, and entirely staffed by smokers, no choice. Smoker-operated businesses will be run out of the State.
This is not prohibition. This is ‘sew on the yellow stars’ time and if you hear anyone scoffing ‘Godwin’s Law’ watch out – they are the ones who look forward to running the gas chambers.
Prohibition is far too small a word for this.
Of all the “tion” words I think “Annihilation” best describes it.
Maybe ‘Extermination’. These people definitely have the single-issue mindset of a Dalek. And about the same social skills.
My reading is that I think it’s just local government banning local government agencies from hiring smokers. It’s pretty thoroughly Nazi, but I don’t think they’re banning anybody other than themselves.
It’s too late for butts: a South Florida city has banned the hiring of employees who smoke or use tobacco products in an effort to save on insurance.
Delray Beach City Commissioners made official Tuesday a policy that refuses city agencies the right hire a person who has smoked in the year before employment.
The ban is meant to help save the cash-strapped city on health insurance premium fees. Human Resources director Bruce Koeser told NBC 6 that each smoker costs an extra $12,000 in health and disability-related costs.
It’s a precedent though. So far they have only legislated to those employers under their direct control. The smoking ban is already legislation over private business. It’s just a small step. If it happens here, and includes private business, Local Shop will have no staff at all. We’re all smokers!
LI,
Re: employment discrimination, see comments by Shadow Guest on Siegel’s thread:
http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com/2012/10/henry-ford-health-system-role-model-for.html#disqus_thread
There’s even taking shots at smokers in Iran:
Iran nixes smoking for executive aspirants
“People addicted to tobacco cannot get jobs with the government’s executive branch, according to the semi-official Iranian Labour News Agency, which cited a directive published Monday by the Cabinet’s information office.
The directive — intended to ensure that applicants are healthy physically and mentally — follows the guidelines of the Law of the National Services Management, ILNA reported.”
http://edition.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/meast/07/19/iran.tobacco.jobs/
I’m surprised at Iran implementing the words of the Great Satan. Seems they’re quite happy with Satan’s spoutings when they fit their own prejudices.
Then again, their total ban on alcohol has been such a great success…
Boardroom quotas for smokers now!
My religion, (it’s not one of the major ones yet), requires me to make ritual burnt offerings of tobacco several times a day. The smoke must be inhaled and held, then exhaled towards heaven. (Tobacco is conveniently available in small tubes.)
Other than that, it’s a fairly undemanding religion. But I take it very seriously.
Health hazard? If so, it’s a small price to pay for some kind of unspecified everlasting life in a heaven of some sort. The holy book has not been written yet, so we’re unsure of the details. Only the offerings are non-negotiable. Not many people know of this religion, but huge numbers worldwide have instinctively adopted the principle sacrament.
Adherents are known for their many positive qualities.
There is a very active group opposed to us, they are a miserable lot.
I’m sure I read recently that there are more tobacco devotees in the world than Muslims, though ;=})
I’d like to find the reference again, but I guess the numbers are out there.
As disturbing as this discriminatory policy is the comments to the linked story…… more than 900 of them – and they’re even rated as “insightful”, “informative”, “interesting”, etc.. The commentators are clueless. They wouldn’t have the faintest idea what’s been happening the last 30 years……. let alone the last 100 years.
O/T For anyone interested, there are some useful comments at:
http://f2cscotland.blogspot.com.uk/2012/10/supreme-court-hearing-for-tobacco.html
“It was second hand smoke, honest guv!” And, given that THEY believe the crap, who is to gainsay the defence?
@ Zaphod
That has to be one of the most brilliant and witty comments I’ve ever read. If there was an annual Best Blog Comment award that would get my vote for Numero Uno.
If you don’t mind, I cut and pasted it and sent a copy to my local councilman lest she or he get the big idea to follow the foul, bigot-in-green eyeshades lead of Delray Beach.
How do you blood test for extreme smokerphobia – elevated levels of bile perhaps?
I love this!
Why? Well, just how are they going to test for it? The cotinine urine/saliva tests can detect qualitatively and quantitatively but (depending on test, genetics, etc.) after either a few days or, at the most, weeks of non-smoking the result is worthless.
Then there are other sources such as pesticides and diet (eg. aubergines).
Me, I’m going to wait for the first non-smoker who lives in an agricultural area, or who eats egg-plant parmesan, or who walked through some ‘second hand’ smoke to be sacked for using the evil weed (Is it wrong of me to think of standing and blowing smoke at all the Councillors who voted for this just prior to their tests?)
Oh, and next it will be banning anyone who has had an alcoholic drink, is slightly overweight or votes the wrong way – Just you wait and see!