Smokers need not apply

[ma96782]

Maybe the company should be extending their "drug policy" too?

U-Haul will no longer hire smokers in 21 states

Aloha, Mark

Read More

 

[ZA_Survivalist]

Im not a smoker anymore, unless occasional cigars count.. While I understand a potential reasoning being that they dont want the smell to off-put future clientele or perhaps smell stain vehicles/cardboard boxes.. at the same time.. who is a company to dictate what folks can and can't legally do in their free time? I worked with a lot of folks that didnt smoke on the job but did smoke when they were off or right before work. And what about juul/E-cig consumers? There is little to no smell there but it still has nicotine..

Its every bit as absurd as Bloomberg's soda ban. Companies should not make virtue signaling policies that target individuals and what they do/consume in their free time if it doesnt impact them while on the job. Regardless of "health reasons". Distilled spirits arent a natural element on this earth and are every bit as unhealthy as cigarettes.. Are they going to go full prohibition? they going to ban all drinkers too? When does it end? Perhaps they don't hire folks that eat meat because it "impacts the climate".. perhaps they dont hire gun owners because its a "public safety and health risk"..

Its obnoxious to see companies virtue signal like this.. if it doesn't impact their ability to do a job or present themselves well on a job what should it matter? Odds are this is a publicity stunt and perhaps a way to lessen nation wide insurance throughout the company. I highly doubt its merely for "good intentions".. nothing large companies do is ever for good intentions.. there is some kind of underlying money/insurance reason.

 

[MannyGlocks]

What next?

No cheeseburger eaters?

Get 10 lbs overweight and you're gone?

Very slippy (as Bear Grylls likes to say) slope, eh?

 

[CamoDeafie]

What next?

No cheeseburger eaters?

Try get hired at a "vegan" place

Get 10 lbs overweight and you're gone?

That happens a lot in the world of fashion modeling, and any industry where appearances matter to an absurd degree.

 

[2506]

Back when I was working in kitchens, I wouldn't hire smokers either. I never left the line to go outside and sit on my bubblegum for ten minutes every hour for a fresh air break.
U-haul is most likely doing this due to insurance premiums now and in the future. Studies have calculated a different annual cost to employers because of smoking, but regardless of the amount, the reasons are the same: Smokers get sick more and miss more work, and need more medical care, so insurance costs go up.

 

[P7M13]

They already did the accounting calculations and determined a cost benefit to this new policy.
Capitalism is great.

 

[slimmer13]

If you don't like it, don't work there. Free markets.

 

[DLS]

Smokers also have a higher accident rate, that is why non-smokers pay reduced premiums for auto insurance. Nicotine and the lower levels of saturated oxygen in a smoker's blood reduces visual acuity and slows reaction times. For these reasons alone I can't understand why some serious shooters smoke.

 

[Stomper]

Im not a smoker anymore, unless occasional cigars count.. While I understand a potential reasoning being that they dont want the smell to off-put future clientele or perhaps smell stain vehicles/cardboard boxes.. at the same time.. who is a company to dictate what folks can and can't legally do in their free time? I worked with a lot of folks that didnt smoke on the job but did smoke when they were off or right before work. And what about juul/E-cig consumers? There is little to no smell there but it still has nicotine..

Its every bit as absurd as Bloomberg's soda ban. Companies should not make virtue signaling policies that target individuals and what they do/consume in their free time if it doesnt impact them while on the job. Regardless of "health reasons". Distilled spirits arent a natural element on this earth and are every bit as unhealthy as cigarettes.. Are they going to go full prohibition? they going to ban all drinkers too? When does it end? Perhaps they don't hire folks that eat meat because it "impacts the climate".. perhaps they dont hire gun owners because its a "public safety and health risk"..

Its obnoxious to see companies virtue signal like this.. if it doesn't impact their ability to do a job or present themselves well on a job what should it matter? Odds are this is a publicity stunt and perhaps a way to lessen nation wide insurance throughout the company. I highly doubt its merely for "good intentions".. nothing large companies do is ever for good intentions.. there is some kind of underlying money/insurance reason.

It's the same companies that make mandatory drug testing a condition of employment.... no weed for you!

 

[TTSX]

It's a private company who can set whatever standards they want for employees. You don't have to work for them if you don't like their policies. Nothing is stopping you from opening your own moving/rental company.

 

[cookie]

Soon the obese and those consuming alcoholic beverages will no be hired.

 

[Certaindeaf]

Well at least they, and surgeons, and pretty much every other profession can smoke dope.

 

[ZA_Survivalist]

It's the same companies that make mandatory drug testing a condition of employment.... no weed for you!

You mean I cant smoke meth on the job?! Gosh darn-it.

 

[JuglansRegia]

I have worked with smokers, the problem is as soon as the boss is gone they are out back sneaking a smoke break while everyone else is still working. How long does it take to smoke a cigarette, 5-10 minutes? So you smoke 1-2 on your lunch break, then 1 for your 15 minute break, what about the rest of the day? if you sneak in 2-3 more that adds up real quick. One company I worked at had a production manager that was a smoker, he came in every Saturday to make up for all his smoke breaks

 

[Stomper]

Well at least they, and surgeons, and pretty much every other profession can smoke dope.

You forgot the governor and judges!!

 

[clearconscience]

They are trying to make this out about the health of their workers. That's BS.

it's about two things.

1. Time. They don't want people that are going to take several breaks a day.

2. Customer Service. They don't want people who smells like ish.

 

[DLS]

They are trying to make this out about the health of their workers. That's BS.

it's about two things.

1. Time. They don't want people that are going to take several breaks a day.

2. Customer Service. They don't want people who smells like ish.

And,

3. They don't want the added cost of smokers on their health care premiums.

4. They don't want the added liability or pay higher premiums for their liability insurance.

All good reasons in my book. Don't get me wrong here. If smokers want to smoke, the smoke. But to expect another entity / person to pick up the tab for the smoker's decision is not reasonable, at least to my feeble way of thinking.

 

[Aero Denezol]

They are trying to make this out about the health of their workers. That's BS.

Yep. Remember the big tobacco lawsuits? Money squandered/gone. And we thought they cared about us.

Ulterior motives. Kind of reminds me of... gun control

 

[Member 5605]

They are trying to make this out about the health of their workers. That's BS.

it's about two things.

1. Time. They don't want people that are going to take several breaks a day.

2. Customer Service. They don't want people who smells like ish.

Almost. You forgot:

Mandatory health insurance. Premiums are higher for smokers.

 

[powersbj]

It's all about the insurance, alaska airlines has had a no tobacco policy for years, they do check for it.