Quit smoking or quit your job, company says
Overweight workers could be next
Thursday, January 27, 2005 Posted: 5:28 AM EST (1028 GMT)



CHICAGO, Illinois (Reuters) -- The owner of a Michigan company who forced his employees to either quit smoking or quit their jobs said on Wednesday he also wants to tell fat workers to lose weight or else.

A ban on tobacco use -- whether at home or at the workplace -- led four employees to quit their jobs last week at Okemos, Michigan-based Weyco Inc., which handles insurance claims.

The workers refused to take a mandatory urine test demanded of Weyco's 200 employees by founder and sole owner Howard Weyers, a demand that he said was perfectly legal.

"If you don't want to take the test, you can leave," Weyers told Reuters. "I'm not controlling their lives; they have a choice whether they want to work here."

Next on the firing line: overweight workers.

"We have to work on eating habits and getting people to exercise. But if you're obese, you're (legally) protected," Weyers said.

He has brought in an eating disorder therapist to speak to workers, provided eating coaches, created a point system for employees to earn health-related $100 bonuses and plans to offer $45 vouchers for health club memberships.

The 71-year-old Weyers, who said he has never smoked and pronounced himself in good shape thanks to daily runs, said employees' health as well as saving money on the company's own insurance claims led him to first bar smokers from being hired in 2003.

Last year, he banned smoking during office hours, then demanded smokers pay a monthly $50 "assessment," and finally instituted mandatory testing.

Twenty workers quit the habit.

Weyers tells clients to quit whining about health care costs and to "set some expectations; demand some things."

Job placement specialist John Challenger said Weyco's moves could set a precedent for larger companies -- if it survives potential legal challenges.

"Certainly it raises an interesting boundary issue: rising health care costs and society's aversion to smoking versus privacy and freedom rights of an individual," Challenger said.

So far no legal challenges have been made to Weyco's policies <end>


Here's the link: http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/01/26/smoking.reut/index.html

I wonder what his demands will be next:

" All female employees must have breast enhancements or leave? :@@:

If they signed a contract and it said "you cant smoke" and they do, then they deserve to be fired quite simply.

With the "cant be fat" one, I guess it would depend on the job, if your a model then whilst your contract might not state "fat" it would probably dictate you have to be in a high state of health etc and would word the fact that you need to be attractive etc.

My thoughts are that if someone takes a job and they break the contract to which they signed, they have no ground whatsoever to stand on when they break that contract.

In fact screw it, this guy is forcing his employees to lead extremely healthy lives but PAYING them a pretty hefty sum when they accrue so many points. Thats brilliant in my book.

Imagine you have an overweight smoker who lets face the facts here probably isnt in his peak health range. He works for this company and over the course of a year loses the weight and stops smoking, HOW IS THAT BAD??

Give this guys some credit, Smoking is a retarded habit anyway.

I don't smoke, but I would be damned if it was my bosses business what I do on my time. If some one is hired and they can do the job then that is all that is needed. It is none of this guys business what his workers do with their time. If he has some sort of physical that needs to be passed then the workers should be able to pass it. I have seen alot of folks that have smoked for over 30+ years and they can out work 20 year olds. Next the guy will tell them they can only eat raw eggs and fish, and only drink whole milk. This is bull sh** and no one has the right to tell another how to live while they are on their own time.

Thats crap as well its HIS company, if these people dont like it, they can quit and go work else where. If it gets stupid everyone will quit and he will have no employees.

"O i work in a health obsessed IT company and i smoke and eat shit all day!!, what can i do" ..... Ugh quit, and go work in Mcdonalds.

It's illegal.

Doesn't matter if they signed a contract or not. You cannot enforce an illegal contract.

Originally posted by mad dog
I don't smoke, but I would be damned if it was my bosses business what I do on my time. If some one is hired and they can do the job then that is all that is needed. It is none of this guys business what his workers do with their time. If he has some sort of physical that needs to be passed then the workers should be able to pass it. I have seen alot of folks that have smoked for over 30+ years and they can out work 20 year olds. Next the guy will tell them they can only eat raw eggs and fish, and only drink whole milk. This is bull sh** and no one has the right to tell another how to live while they are on their own time.

I totally agree with you. Since when is ther company an overseer to how people live their lives on their own free time? Once your done work and have left company property, you have the right to do as yuo wish.

They may be able to force you workers not to smoke while on company property, duting work hours, but once you leave, they cannot tell you what or what not to do. That is plain control what they are doing.

I don't smoke and I encourage others not to smoke, but I respect their right to choose. Some people just don't want to quit smoking, than that is up to them.

Originally posted by Lokideviluk
Thats crap as well its HIS company,

Sorry Lokideviluk, what happens at his company is his business,BUT what these folks do{legally} at there homes or even in their cars on there time is their business. He has no right to tell another how to live. he may have a good idea and may have good advice but HITLER is no longer and neither should he be.

if these people dont like it, they can quit and go work else where.

I would love to see him fire someone for doing a legal activity on their time he can't I wish I worked for him because I'ld drive by his house with a cigar, and ice cream every chance I got. He is full of sh** for trying to force his way of life on another even if his advice might be for the better. THIS IS A FREE COUNTRY!!!

If it gets stupid everyone will quit and he will have no employees.

Or if his employes are stupid they'll follow his made up laws.

"O i work in a health obsessed IT company and i smoke and eat shit all day!!, what can i do" ..... Ugh quit, and go work in Mcdonalds.

Or I could be smart get a lawyer and fight this jack a** that is trying to tell me how to live on my personal time. This guy is way over the line, even though he may be trying to help.

Originally posted by DrewM
It's illegal.

Doesn't matter if they signed a contract or not. You cannot enforce an illegal contract.

It's quite legal, actually. As long as someone isn't in a protected class (women, minority, disabled, old, gay (in some areas) etc.) and they haven't signed a contract, then they're an employee at will and can be fired for any reason or for no reason.

Personally, I wouldn't want to work for a company like that even if my health insurance premiums were lower, but that's just me.

You cannot just be fired for any reason. Where did you get that info?

you know, he has a point.
this employer has to offer health insurance, and he's got to be paying some outlandish premiums for his employees that smoke or considered "high-rish" by any other factor. i don't know that i'd want to pay out the ass for others' indulgences.

Originally posted by DrewM
You cannot just be fired for any reason. Where did you get that info?
Yes you can. Where did you get the info to the contrary?

Originally posted by BorgHunter
Yes you can. Where did you get the info to the contrary?

Sure, employment at will does technically give the employer the ability to fire somebody, in most states (not all states) - but in reality there is so much other legislation that you can win a suit against the employer if you can prove discrimination, especially if the employer has over 15 employees.

Originally posted by DrewM
Sure, employment at will does technically give the employer the ability to fire somebody, in most states (not all states) - but in reality there is so much other legislation that you can win a suit against the employer if you can prove discrimination, especially if the employer has over 15 employees.

That's basically what I said - as long as they're not in a protected class and don't have a contract, they can be fired for any reason. People who smoke are not a protected class. And even people in a protected class can be fired at any time for a non-discriminatory reason.

Of course the reality is that very few companies have the balls to try something like this and I'm sure they will get sued. But as long as they're willing to fight it in court, they will win.

Originally posted by LionelHutz
[B]That's basically what I said - as long as they're not in a protected class and don't have a contract, they can be fired for any reason.

Things must be different in the state3s if someone can be fired without just cause. In canada, as long as an employee has completed their 90 day probationary period, the company must have a just reason to terminate someone's employment. Smoking or eating unhealthy during their own free time is not just cause to fire someone just because they company complains that it is more insurance to pay out.

There was a company here in Windsor Ontario that fired a woman unjustly and that comapny got sued. she sued them for $75,000 in lost wages and $50,000 in damages. She won. That's $ 125,000 she won. That company went under shroty afterwards.

Originally posted by LionelHutz
That's basically what I said - as long as they're not in a protected class and don't have a contract, they can be fired for any reason. People who smoke are not a protected class. And even people in a protected class can be fired at any time for a non-discriminatory reason.

Of course the reality is that very few companies have the balls to try something like this and I'm sure they will get sued. But as long as they're willing to fight it in court, they will win.

Yes, but you don't have to be in a protected class to make a discrimination case. Fired because you smoke is discrimination.

Also, government workers & union employees are protected from employment at will.

I can agree most with DrewM. I wasn't sure at first, but I'm now a lot more confident that this would be an illegal act!

Then whats the point of contracts, may as well burn the lot of them if we are saying that regardless of whats in the contract, if you break it, and they sack you just sue them and youll get the money back.

If within that contract it says they have to mantain a specific health up and not smoke..ever. Then they have no leg to stand on when they complain. If he has brought this in afterwards then that will cause problems since its hard to force your current workforce to change.

It's not common for US employees to have a contract. Unlike the UK where it's very common to have a contract & have to work 3 months when you hand in your notice.

Originally posted by DrewM
Yes, but you don't have to be in a protected class to make a discrimination case. Fired because you smoke is discrimination.

Companies are allowed to discriminate against those that aren't in a protected class! Yes, really. And really, it makes sense, because why else would you need a protected class. Besides, any employment decision you make on who to hire or promote is discrimating against someone.

Originally posted by DrewM
Also, government workers & union employees are protected from employment at will.

Right. They're protected from just about everything.

The more unhealthy a company's employees get, the more their health insurance goes up and that cost is passed on to ALL the employees - not just the ones that are indulging in unhealthy activites. He has a perfect right to protect ALL his employees from rising healthcare costs by doing this. What these people are doing by stuffing their faces with junk food and smoking cigs is costing ALL his emplyees money.

It is not discriminatory. Discrimination is limited to a small area of things. sex, sexual preference, disability, race, gender, color, religion, national origin, ancestry, culture, or linguistic characteristics common to a specific ethnic group.

Obesity may be a disability though I don't think it should be. Being stupid enough to smoke is not considered a disability.

I dunno..I don't smoke nor do I consider myself overweight, but If I worked for someone like that, I think I'd start looking for work somewhere else...that is, unless he paid really well :(

This is complete and utter bullshit. This guy is trying to control everyone else. Even if its for the better, even if its for a good reasons thats no excuse.

Now if it was because of him being worried about having to pay out insurence then he should give optional pay raises to employees that do subject themselves to his fantasies. However firing people is outright wrong and unjust.

Originally posted by Dunkirk101
I can agree most with DrewM. I wasn't sure at first, but I'm now a lot more confident that this would be an illegal act!

Although the guy could have some valid come back on his employer. I read up on this and for the most part Lionel was right & I was wrong.

The guy has balls. This could set a precedent, but which way will the precedent go?

Smoking and stuffing your face with crap will eventually negativly impact your health, so in the long run it will affect the work place. At this point the whole thing is rather entertaining.

Someone will soon sue his ass for preventing them from earning a living to feed their family. If I can do my job successfully what difference should it make if I weigh 400 pounds and smoke like a fiend?

I guess the question becomes, can someone "force" another to live a healthy lifestyle?

Originally posted by ~Sal~

I guess the question becomes, can someone "force" another to live a healthy lifestyle?

Apparently not, but he should then say to his employees that any sick days they have off that are connected with their bad diets and/or smoking, is all unpaid. Since he gave them ample (in fact loads of) ways in which they could have prevented such from happening.

Oh come on, it is not even a matter of the law here. It is just common sense. If you work somewhere where there is a rule against smoking, you either do not smoke or you quit. Bringing your boss to court over something like this would be stupid. Were I the judge in this sort of case, I would laugh it right out of my courtroom.

I do agree however that this has slight tinges of totalitarianism in it, but maybe in a good way. You must admit that if people could not get a job if they smoked or were obese, NO ONE would smoke or be obese. This is not like forcing people to eat their own babies here!

As an afterthought, if other people pick up this guys idea, the tobacco companies kick up a fuss about this (and maybe people like McDonalds, although they are valiantly trying to health-a-tize themselves and probably would only try harder.)

Lets face it the big corporations run the country, apparently i heard Mcdonalds actually had legislation pushed through to stop people suiing them for becomming unhealthy through their food.

The cigarette companys (if they havent already) will have legislation made to stop people suiing them for getting ill through smoking.

Originally posted by Lokideviluk
Lets face it the big corporations run the country, apparently i heard Mcdonalds actually had legislation pushed through to stop people suiing them for becomming unhealthy through their food.

The cigarette companys (if they havent already) will have legislation made to stop people suiing them for getting ill through smoking.

It wasn't just McDonald's, but that's mostly correct. Of course many (if not a majority) of people think it's pretty damn obvious that eating too much fast food is going to make you fat and it's not McDonald's fault if you do.

Ok lets do this, everyone will get up at a certain time.
{1} take a shower {no one wants your germs at work}

{2}you will eat 2 raw eggs and drink a glass of oj

{3} Then you will get on public transport{no personal vehicles you could hurt yourself}

{4} report to work at lunch you will eat 1 sandwich and a bowl of applesauce/ or apple, and drink milk.

{5} at the end of the day you will get back on public transport and report straight to your home.

{6} you will take another shower

{7} you will eat a piece of fish and a veggy, plus drink another glass of milk.

{8} Now you will go straight to bed no TV or radio it is unhealthy and could give you bad thoughts/ideas.

Repeat all week on the weekend you are allowed 2hrs of TV {prechosen} and 4hrs of a radio{prechosen}. You will not party or go out unless it is absolutely needed, food etc... You will not drink soda, beer, whisky, etc... only fruit/veggy drinks milk and water. You can not eat anything like chips, deep fry, icecream, etc... You are only allowed to have sex with a prechosen women and only at certain times. There will be no sex for fun only to carry on society.


Why should this jerk stop at smoking and diet after all he is only helping, helping us into a corporation dictatorship. The hell with personal freedoms as long as Jack ass can help with obesity and smoking.

THEY CAN QUIT!!

Its one company, Its HIS company, He should be allowed to do whatever the F8ck he wants to do within the law, and if his staff dont like it they can QUIT.

Maybe this link will make things a tad less hazy... or maybe a tad more murky... here it is...http://www.weyco.com/web/forms/serveForm?f=000030&t=pdf

I say All praise for WEYCO, and thankyou to Sal for making this availble

Originally posted by Lokideviluk
THEY CAN QUIT!!

Its one company, Its HIS company, He should be allowed to do whatever the F8ck he wants to do within the law, and if his staff dont like it they can QUIT.

{1} agreed

{2}With this being said, IT"S ALSO THEIR PERSONAL LIVES, and he should not be able to tell them what to do on their time. Smoking is legal and the last I knew eating is also. What they do at his company is his business, what they do with their personal lives is their business. If he wants to give a bonus or something to those that live a healthier lifestyle then no problem. NO ONE should have the power to tell folks what they can or can't do{legally} on their own free time. If these folks can complete their job dutys then he should mind his own business. Maybe he should make a law about being over 60 oooops that would mean he would have to sell out.

Sal;

Thanks for the post it does help clear some stuff up. But it still leaves a question of how much power do we give to a business? Do they have the right to tell us what type of vehicle to drive? What type of meat to eat? What part of town to live in? All of these problems kill people also is it corperations right to have the power to tell us how, when, where, to live? The best part about this country is that we are free, and as long as something is legal then I don't see how another can dictate to us how to live.

I do agree smoking and over eating are bad and nasty habbits, but that does not give me the right to tell another what they can or can't do. I also noticed this program just started and new employes have to sign a contract, fair enough. What about those that are healthy but like to smoke and have been with the company before his contract. According to him he will fire anyone who smokes after JAN 1. Sorry but if this was not in my contract when I started he would be getting a much diserved lawsuit.

Originally posted by mad dog
Sal;

Thanks for the post it does help clear some stuff up. But it still leaves a question of how much power do we give to a business? Do they have the right to tell us what type of vehicle to drive? What type of meat to eat? What part of town to live in? All of these problems kill people also is it corperations right to have the power to tell us how, when, where, to live? The best part about this country is that we are free, and as long as something is legal then I don't see how another can dictate to us how to live.

I do agree smoking and over eating are bad and nasty habbits, but that does not give me the right to tell another what they can or can't do. I also noticed this program just started and new employes have to sign a contract, fair enough. What about those that are healthy but like to smoke and have been with the company before his contract. According to him he will fire anyone who smokes after JAN 1. Sorry but if this was not in my contract when I started he would be getting a much diserved lawsuit.

My biggest problem with this is exactly what you have stated as well... it's the "control" aspect. It's the Big Brother is watching you mentality.

Do I think this company has that right... yeah given their perspective I do. They are all about lowering insurance premiums etc. Will it get passed on to me... doubtful. Will it increase their profit... likely. Will in help me in anyway... highly unlikely.

And where does it end? I don't want the government, or the church in my bedroom and I sure as hell don't want my employer on my balcony monitoring my smoking habits.

This will set a precedent, but it is disconcerting in the extreme.

How far do we go to protect another from themselves and where do your rights end and mine begin. We are creeping vigilantly toward the "right" on everything. Just like before we swung too far to the left. Both have immense danger. Between government and big business ......... oh wait..... government and big business... I think that may be an oxymoron... :)

Guess it is our nature to dance the line!

there is this book called "Jennifer Government" Where employees are nigh on owned by their employer to the point that their surnames become the company they work for. Its extreme but it has some very clever points in it.

Sal & Lokideviluk;

I believe we feel the same about smoking and bad life habbits. My whole point was not about smoking it was about how much power does corporate get? Years back there was an American car company that got pissed of at Japan. 1st they made the employes who drove foriegn cars park in the back, then they more or less forced them to quit or either go buy American. Is this what we want in our society, today walmart runs the world tomorrow it will be ford.

Lokideviluk;

Just curious what if this guy told these people they had to start smoking, company policy, how would you feel about that? Lets say you work for Lay Chips and they told you that you had to eat a bag of chips everynight. How would you vote if the shoe was on the other foot? Lets not forget this guys is doing this for profit more then anything, so maybe it would be better for Lays to have fat people.

Mad Dog - the thing that keeps the corporation from getting too much power is the likelihood that any more such rules would cause all of his employees to quit. Everyone can make choices - if the other benefits of the job make it worthwhile, they'll stay. If the rules are too annoying, they'll quit. It's that simple. No one's rights are being infringed upon because they always have the right to go elsewhere.

Personally, I wouldn't mind working there (if that was the only restriction) because it seems like everywhere I've worked, the smokers spend half their day outside "on break."

Originally posted by mad dog
Lokideviluk;

Just curious what if this guy told these people they had to start smoking, company policy, how would you feel about that? Lets say you work for Lay Chips and they told you that you had to eat a bag of chips everynight. How would you vote if the shoe was on the other foot? Lets not forget this guys is doing this for profit more then anything, so maybe it would be better for Lays to have fat people.

If it was allowed Id Quit the job on both accounts, however forcing me to smoke or eat large quanititys of fatty food would be them actively destroying my health and thus they would be liable for me to sue them when i got ill or got lung cancer.

Where as the gentleman who banned smoking is making people healthy.

... I am not changing my opinion about this, but I thought as I was reading a few of the latest posts that there might be a better (although less profitable) way. There should be positive reinforcement for losing weight and quitting smoking!

However, as I was writing that, I realized that that wasn't actually a better idea (bear with me here lol). Americans, and people on the whole, respond better to the threat of things being taken away if they are bad then to the idea of getting something if they are good.

Oh wow I just realized this post has absolutely no point...

When are people going to start taking responsibility for their choices?

If you don't like what's on TV, turn it off.

If you don't want to work for a company that doesn't hire smokers, quit.

If you want to stuff your face untill you weigh 450 pounds, accept that many companies will not hire you due to health insurance costs and time lost from work due to your poor health.

I agree with everyone here {smoking/over eating is bad}.

The real issue is not about smoke or food, the real issue is about having someone run a persons private life. Like I have said allow or don't allow whatever during work time, but personal time is just thatpersonal

Lokideviluk;

Thanks for trying to answer but you drove right back around to this guy is good for me so it's OK. Like I said put the shoe on the other foot have this guy do something you don't agree with and you get a different opinion. I agree smoking is bad, but that still doesn't mean I should allow a corporation the power to rule my private life. Today I agree with the company, tomorrow they tell me something else that I don't agree. Instead of giving them the power to rule over my private life in the 1st place I would rather stop the buck. If you give him the power today and then dislike his view tomorrow what is to stop you from sueing him for that. If he made the new employes sign a contract then fine, but for those that have been there and didn't sign a contract at the begaining, then I hope they sue and win.

I also think DarkFantasy96 has a better solution try a program that shows the faults of smoking and over eating. Give those that make an effort better insurance, bonus, etc... Let the workers see that their rates could go down with a change of life. Forcing others to live your way is nothing more then HITLER at its finest.

Originally posted by mad dog
Forcing others to live your way is nothing more then HITLER at its finest.

You can keep saying that, but NO ONE IS BEING FORCED TO DO ANYTHING!

Mad Dog = If i had to smoke or Quit, i would Quit. I wouldnt even look to suiing him, i would simply move on disgruntled and pissed off, but getting over it pretty quickly.

Its just seems a Man has taken a stand to try and get his staff into great health by taking away that which is proven to decrease health. Your hyperthetical situation was based on him doing something which was directly damaging my health, which would be just the same as him saying "Everyone here has to eat mcdonalds every day for lunch" They would be unhealthy etc.

Stopping people smoking has no negative health effects (excluding mental symptoms) so it makes sense.

Why in the hell do people smoke anyway, It tasts nasty, you know it removes your taste buds and it makes your teeth yellow? Not to mention it gives you a free entry into the Lung cancer 500 loto, and Congrats if you win that one.

LionelHutz, lets say you where with this guy for 19 years and you planned on retiring in the next 6 years. You like your job and you are damn good a what you do, but you also smoke have for as long as you can remember. Now all of a sudden this guys tells you either do this {on your personal time} or your out. You are healthy and never have had one problem with your habbit, but now you have to change something you may enjoy because another person wants to run your life. Either you throw your lifes work down the tubes or you throw something you enjoy away. This is exactly like HITLER, we are a free country and this guy has no business telling others what they can or can't do with their free time and personal lives. Next he we tell them they cant sky dive or go camping in the woods. So see he is exactly acting like a Hitler in his own little world, he is forcing another to live under his rule even if it is 1 person it is wrong. I can not believe that people in this country would let a company tell them how to live their lives.


People make unsafe judgements every day does this mean we should start a new corporation police to tell us what we can or can't do? Should we stay a free country or let business and government tell us what, when, how to take a crap?

Lokideviluk;

YOUR STILL MISSING THE POINT :( :(

I've allready said I don't care for smoking I also wouldn't go around shoving hooks into my skin either but some folks do.

Take smoking out of the situation; lets say this guy told you that you could never swim again{after all more people die from drowning then smoking} or drive, or cook over a grill. He should not have the authority to tell another what they can or can not do LEGALLY ON THEIR ON TIME!!!!

Originally posted by mad dog
Take smoking out of the situation; lets say this guy told you that you could never swim again{after all more people die from drowning then smoking} or drive, or cook over a grill. He should not have the authority to tell another what they can or can not do LEGALLY ON THEIR ON TIME!!!!
Don't like his policies? QUIT. He's the employer, he can set any unreasonable requirements on his employees that he likes, and the employees have options: Go on strike, quit, or just take it. Or smoke privately and hope he never finds out. NO ONE IS BEING FORCED TO DO ANYTHING.

Borg the guy is forcing people to choose between something they may have enjoyed for years or their job that they need. So if they choose to smoke under the cover then they are still running a risk. I don't understand why you folks can not see the bigger picture. IF something is legal and was never in a personal contract then how does junior Hitler have the right to tell a person how to live their life? Folks wonder why the country is his going to hell?????????????????????????????

Oh and as I have pointed out sometimes it's not so easy as to just quit but this seems to be the norm for todays society "just quit". When some of you get up there in the years tell me how easy it is to just quit tell me how easy it is for a 50 year old to start over in a new job that's if anyone will hire them in the 1st place.

Mad dog, the employer has rights too. If I don't want to employ blacks/whites/smokers/blondes/one-legged rhinoceroses, why should I have to? It's my money, I shouldn't have to give it to someone I don't want to, unless of course they have already done the job and are expecting payment. I think the guy is an asshole and I'd never work for him, sure, but he's within his rights.

Originally posted by mad dog
Borg the guy is forcing people to choose between something they may have enjoyed for years or their job that they need.

Yeah, you're right, he's forcing them to make a choice. That happens all the freaking time. All of the airlines gave their employees choices - take a pay cut or watch the airline go under. Other people are suddenly forced to work second shift or lose their job. Move to a different position in the company or lose your job. Transfer to a different location or lose your job. It happens every day. The only reason we're talking about this is because it's smoking.

Originally posted by LionelHutz
Transfer to a different location or lose your job. It happens every day. The only reason we're talking about this is because it's smoking.

That happened to me 2 weeks ago at HP :) and your right, this is because its smoking and people are really attached to it, but then it stands to reason, it is a drug after all.

I'm only going to say this one more time I hope you can figure it out THE GUY IS TELLING HIS WORKERS WHAT THEY CAN OR CAN NOT DO {this part is the important part} ON THEIR PRIVATE TIME. Going to 2nd shift, changing pay, etc... is job related. I have done many things that I may not like in different jobs but I would never let a boss tell me how to live my life outside of the work area. He is their boss not their parent, god or the KGB, he has no power over their personal time.

Borg, I had to laugh at your post, you wouldn't employ someone because of their race, I would like to see that happen :D :D{I know you were probably just trying to make a point}

Also if the previous workers did not sign a contract about smoking on there personal time he is not in his legal right to force them. He is in his legal right to form a new contract for new workers. I would bet those that have been with him for awhile do have a case against him if they never signed a contract{don't forget I'm talking about personal time not work} If he wants to draw up a contract for new workers and they sign it then fine. I'm trying to point out that the older employes have their right and a thing called grandfather claus.

Originally posted by LionelHutz
Yeah, you're right, he's forcing them to make a choice. That happens all the freaking time. All of the airlines gave their employees choices - take a pay cut or watch the airline go under. Other people are suddenly forced to work second shift or lose their job. Move to a different position in the company or lose your job. Transfer to a different location or lose your job. It happens every day.

Lets see did the airline tell the people which church to go to? Did they tell them what TV shows to watch? did they tell them which bars they can go to? what places to eat at? my quess would be NO. Everything that you mentioned was job related, had nothing to do with personal life.

The only reason we're talking about this is because it's smoking.

Maybe you, not me. I'm talking about this because of corporation invasion on personal life. I new a girl{high on the ladder} that worked for a big company. She went to a bar, they had a wet t-shirt contest which she entered. Word got back to some of the holy rollers of the company. They jumped her and threatened her job if she ever went to a place like this again. Was this OK for them to do? They thought so

Originally posted by mad dog
Also if the previous workers did not sign a contract about smoking on there personal time he is not in his legal right to force them. He is in his legal right to form a new contract for new workers.

If they had a contract to begin with, you're correct. Chances are, like most non-union workers, they never had a contract. If there's no contract, he can do whatever he wants as long as there's a non-discriminatory reason behind it. And when I say non-discriminatory, I mean doesn't discriminate against a group recognized by the courts as being subject to discrimination. And to my knowledge, no court has ever found smokers to be a discriminated against group.

Lionel If you don't mind me asking can a company make and enforce a contract with its workers, that tells them what to do on personal time? I know the military, gov. jobs etc.. can, but that is different. example could k-mart force their employes to not eat saltine crackers during their personal time? I'm not being a smart a** I'm just trying to understand why should corporation be able to control folks even when they are off the clock. As long as a person is doing nothing illegal then how can a company dictate their life? I don't believe in unions{they served their purpose at one time but now they are just another money maker}, but I do believe in personal rights.

Hmmm, I'm not sure. I mean basically you can agree to almost anything that's not illegal in a contract as long as both sides are receiving some sort of benefit. I wouldn't be the least bit surprised, though, if a lot of the states have laws preventing that sort of thing. I know Henry Ford had hired goons keeping track of his employees after hours and I'd be willing to bet that some states passed laws to put an end to that sort of thing.

Thanks I was just wondering. The other thing is can they make a person sign a contract after they have allready worked with the company for x amount of years? This is what I don't understand about this weyco deal. The company has been around from 79{I think}. IF a person had been with the company from then it seems they would have things built up 401, retire, etc.... Now lets say that person is a smoker and they don't want to quit, could they be legally fired for smoking on their time? I read somewhere that 4 people have been canned for either not taking a smoke test or for failing it. {example}Lets say someone is making a 100,000 a year they have 5 years left to retire, is this guy going to make up the 500,000 when he fires them for doing something legal? I don't know if anyone is going to fight this bosshog but it sure does seem like he is pulling some bull??? I'm all for not smoking but as long as it is legal how can anyone have a say in what people do on their time?

America is soooooo much different than England. Since i was 16 ive never ever been in a job where there wasnt a contract. It makes sense why there is so many people suiing each other now though.

In our contract we have the choice of signing it, and thus agreeing and complying with everything in it, or not signing and leaving. In that contract it has somewhere that they are allowed to change so long as were given a months notice so basically were their bitch but to be fair no one ever reads the contracts so were screwed from the offset.

I do now think though that the Dude wont get away with changing the people whom havent signed a contract to begin with, shame since the muppets who are smoking are only killing themselves anyway.

Originally posted by mad dog
Thanks I was just wondering. The other thing is can they make a person sign a contract after they have allready worked with the company for x amount of years?

You mean like an employee works for 30 years without a contract and then the company says, "sign a contract or you're fired?" Yeah, they could do that.

Originally posted by mad dog
IF a person had been with the company from then it seems they would have things built up 401, retire, etc.... Now lets say that person is a smoker and they don't want to quit, could they be legally fired for smoking on their time? I read somewhere that 4 people have been canned for either not taking a smoke test or for failing it. {example}Lets say someone is making a 100,000 a year they have 5 years left to retire, is this guy going to make up the 500,000 when he fires them for doing something legal? I don't know if anyone is going to fight this bosshog but it sure does seem like he is pulling some bull??? I'm all for not smoking but as long as it is legal how can anyone have a say in what people do on their time?

As I said earlier, as long as there's no discriminatory reason (against a recognized group of discriminated against people) then yeah, he could fire them. An older worker could sue arguing that he was canned just because he was old and then it would be up to a court to figure out if he was fired due to being old or smoking. The one thing I'm not 100% sure about is whether he could fire smokers for poor performance/insubordination or if he'd have to lay them off. My guess is that he'd have to lay them off as long as they didn't smoke on the job. Meaning that they'd be eligible for unemployment benefits and any other job benefits that a laid off employee would get.

Originally posted by mad dog
Lionel If you don't mind me asking can a company make and enforce a contract with its workers, that tells them what to do on personal time? I know the military, gov. jobs etc.. can, but that is different. example could k-mart force their employes to not eat saltine crackers during their personal time? I'm not being a smart a** I'm just trying to understand why should corporation be able to control folks even when they are off the clock. As long as a person is doing nothing illegal then how can a company dictate their life? I don't believe in unions{they served their purpose at one time but now they are just another money maker}, but I do believe in personal rights.

because of out of pocket cost to him, that boss has a say on anything his employees do in their private time that's going to affect HIM.

Originally posted by jennygadling
because of out of pocket cost to him, that boss has a say on anything his employees do in their private time that's going to affect HIM.

If this is true then if a person worked for chevy but drove a ford then their boss could fire them. After all employes should buy only what their company makes, or what line of bull they sell??? I still doubt that a company can have control over what a person does legally on their personal time. When I worked for sh**mart they told us we had to shop only at their stores. Legally they could not make us do this but they did put alot of pressure on. I understand that if someone is stupid enough to sign a contract that would effect their personal time then they need to live with it. What I don't understand is how this guy can bring a contract into someones allready existing job, that effects their legal activitys during their non-working hrs. From what I understand most of his employes don't smoke anyway, but it would be interesting to see a 20 year employ fight this. From what some folks are writting here I quess they don't mind having freedoms taken away by corporation? We are losing enough freedoms without having corporations stepping in and taking them. I've allways felt what goes on at work stays at work and what goes on in personal life stays there. I quess times are changing and money and power are truely becoming the Gods of modern time.

Originally posted by Lokideviluk
America is soooooo much different than England. Since i was 16 ive never ever been in a job where there wasnt a contract. It makes sense why there is so many people suiing each other now though.

America has had contracts for years, it was there to protect the worker and company. My problem is not with a working contract it is with a personal time contract.


In our contract we have the choice of signing it, and thus agreeing and complying with everything in it, or not signing and leaving.

same here

In that contract it has somewhere that they are allowed to change so long as were given a months notice so basically were their bitch but to be fair no one ever reads the contracts so were screwed from the offset.

do your new contracts control your free time what you eat, what you drive, where you would go on vacation?

I do now think though that the Dude wont get away with changing the people whom havent signed a contract to begin with, shame since the muppets who are smoking are only killing themselves anyway.

People do things everyday that they could die from, should companys make up contracts that protect us from every possible way of dying? If that is the case then no one would be able to even go to work. The coporation should worry only about what happens at the job and stay the he** out of peoples personal issues.

Originally posted by mad dog
People do things everyday that they could die from, should companys make up contracts that protect us from every possible way of dying? If that is the case then no one would be able to even go to work.
Well, then problem solved! Once the companies have a lack of employees, they'll stop being idiots!
The coporation should worry only about what happens at the job and stay the he** out of peoples personal issues.
I agree. I would never work for a company that tells me what I should do on my personal time. But, they can fire people for whatever they want to, unless they're under contract. If you're a good employee, only an idiot would fire you for smoking on your own time anyway...

Originally posted by mad dog
If this is true then if a person worked for chevy but drove a ford then their boss could fire them. After all employes should buy only what their company makes, or what line of bull they sell??? I still doubt that a company can have control over what a person does legally on their personal time. When I worked for sh**mart they told us we had to shop only at their stores. Legally they could not make us do this but they did put alot of pressure on. I understand that if someone is stupid enough to sign a contract that would effect their personal time then they need to live with it. What I don't understand is how this guy can bring a contract into someones allready existing job, that effects their legal activitys during their non-working hrs. From what I understand most of his employes don't smoke anyway, but it would be interesting to see a 20 year employ fight this. From what some folks are writting here I quess they don't mind having freedoms taken away by corporation? We are losing enough freedoms without having corporations stepping in and taking them. I've allways felt what goes on at work stays at work and what goes on in personal life stays there. I quess times are changing and money and power are truely becoming the Gods of modern time.

this isn't the same as an employee not buying his company's products. he has a say so over things in there personal lives that affect HIM financially. he's paying out of the ass for medical insurance; why should he be expected to pay more because his employees choose to indulge?

Borg You have the right idea we need strong independent people that will tell these bosshogs when to stick it.

Originally posted by jennygadling
this isn't the same as an employee not buying his company's products. he has a say so over things in there personal lives that affect HIM financially.

WRONG, if I work for ford and drive a chevy I have hurt the company financially. Not only did I but my money into chevy but others are going to question "why does this guy drive a chevy while he is working for ford?" bad advertisment. This guy is selling health issues so when someone witnesses one of his workers smoking it looks bad for business. He even said he is doing this because it looks better for his business.

he's paying out of the ass for medical insurance; why should he be expected to pay more because his employees choose to indulge?

Show me the proof where he is paying out the arse? Like I said in the above he is doing this because it is better advertising for his company/way of life.

Originally posted by mad dog
Like I said in the above he is doing this because it is better advertising for his company/way of life.

Well no shit, Its good business sense to activelly seek better advertising campaigns.

With regards to the insurance information, i believe that was all in the original write up for it and lets face it here. Smokers get chest infections all the time and when they do they take time off it means money down the drain for him.

Smoking is pointless habit and in his company, which he runs and owns, which he has put his effort and time into creating and mantaining, should he not be allowed to choose if his employees smoke or not.

It seems extremist but these people have the choice of leaving and i imagine with the totally retarded idea of no contracts that he will have to pay through the nose intially to get rid of the cancer stick lovers, but afterwards he can implement a hardcore contract which clearly defines that if you work for this company and you smoke on your free time or at work you will get sacked.

Just for example on a extremist type action, if HP said to me "Your unhealthy and thus creating a bad image for the company, you have to eat a planned diet to which you will recieve support in creating, that will allow you to gain the recommended daily intake of all the vital vitamins and minerals." Id be happy, because whilst id probably hate them after the first couple of days of not being able to indulge, over a few months it would become routine and i would become healthier because of it. It would force me to do it because i need this job, and by not giving me any other option i would be able to get into that shape that i want to.

The smokers in his company that are bitching have probably all at some point said to freinds or themselves "Im gonna quit this, its not doing me any favours" but just didnt have the willpower. So now forcing them to do it, is giving them no option and helping them.

He is making a move to save money by eliminating a cause of employee sickness. Name some negatives to this.

Lokidevil you are going back to smoking again I have allready said not smoking is a good choice. Corporation controling personal lives is a bad choice this is what I am debating. Have you ever heard of taking responsibility for your own actions or do you like to have a baby sitter that can tell you when to sh** or not? Why does adult society need big brother breathing down their necks. You either want to be an adult or you don't?

As I said I don't like smoking but it is a free country

Originally posted by Lokideviluk
. Smokers get chest infections all the time and when they do they take time off it means money down the drain for him.

Show me where all smokers get sick more then non-smokers? YOU CAN"T. kind of like saying anyone who rides a motorcycle is going to be in a horrific accident.

Smoking is pointless habit

so isn't skydiving but people do have freedoms.


Just for example on a extremist type action, if HP said to me "Your unhealthy and thus creating a bad image for the company, you have to eat a planned diet to which you will recieve support in creating, that will allow you to gain the recommended daily intake of all the vital vitamins and minerals." Id be happy, because whilst id probably hate them after the first couple of days of not being able to indulge, over a few months it would become routine and i would become healthier because of it. It would force me to do it because i need this job, and by not giving me any other option i would be able to get into that shape that i want to.

So what you are saying is that you need a baby sitter you are not mentally old enough to take care of yourself? Maybe if your judgement is so bad your not old enough to live in a free society. Maybe instead of looking for jobs everyone should be appointed jobs, Lets see you look strong I think you'll dig sh**ers for the rich. A job is a job personal life is personal life learn responsibilty

The smokers in his company that are bitching have probably all at some point said to freinds or themselves "Im gonna quit this, its not doing me any favours" but just didnt have the willpower. So now forcing them to do it, is giving them no option and helping them.

You may be correct, and then again maybe your not, but in a free society we have the freedom of choice.

You may be correct, and then again maybe your not, but in a free society we have the freedom of choice.
then they can choose to quit cant they.

Ok then what your basically saying is that everyone has the right to free choice and complete freedom so long as it isnt illegal in their personal life.

If you were a devouted Christian who ran a daycare centre and one of your staff on his free time practice Satanism whilst also doing gay porno movies for that bit of extra cash would you try and get him to swap? The guy never brings any of this up at work and it hasnt affected his ability to do the job at all?

What about a Football player who goes out gets drunk and screws prostitues on a regular basis with no care when the papers find out. He stills come to training every day and still performs amazing on the pitch so would you try and change him?

Ill just assume your a retard if your asking the question, Do smokers get more ill than no smokers since you obviously havent heard of lung cancer. I work in an office have done for 3 years and i have seen the smokers at some point have a chest infection. Never have i seen a non smoker with a chest infection. Smoking reduces your bodys ability to heal - fact. So go figure what effect that will have,

Originally posted by Lokideviluk
Ill just assume your a retard if your asking the question,

Well I quess you just proved who the real retard is. I know many folks who have smoked for years 20-30-50+ never once missed work because of smoking, never had an ill because of smoking. Lets be real here please, everyone handles things different{smoking, eating, etc...} I am really starting to wonder how many smokers you have really known???? doesn't sound like you know many. I am not saying smoking is good for you but it does not cause problems for every one that smokes. Once again show me the proof where smoking as caused cancer, lung disease, etc... in every one that has smoked.

Your going to have your exceptions in every case arnt you but if we are working on facts ill throw a few at you that i think justify its extinction.

Tobacco use kills around 106,000 people in the UK every year, more than 300 every day - as if a plane crashed every day and killed all its passengers, around 20% of all deaths

About 90% of cases of peripheral vascular disease which lead to amputation of one or both legs are caused by smoking - about 2000 amputations a year in the UK.

Teenage smokers experience more asthma and respiratory symptoms than non-smokers, suffer poorer health, have more school absences and are less fit.

Passive smoking also harms babies and children, with an increased risk of lower respiratory tract infection, increased severity of asthma symptoms, more frequent occurrence of chronic coughs, phlegm and wheezing, and increased risk of cot death and chronic middle ear effusion (glue ear).

Im curious, If your children started smoking at the legal age (in the uk its 16) would you try and stop them? and if yes why? Its their FREECHOICE to smoke, so god forbid you should be protecting their health over their freechoice to smoke.

Originally posted by mad dog
I know many folks who have smoked for years 20-30-50+ never once missed work because of smoking, never had an ill because of smoking.

Of course they're spending way more time standing around outside while everyone else is working.

Thankyou for your info and as I have been saying I do agree it can be harmfull to some but not to everyone that does it.

Originally posted by Lokideviluk
Im curious, If your children started smoking at the legal age (in the uk its 16) would you try and stop them? and if yes why? Its their FREECHOICE to smoke, so god forbid you should be protecting their health over their freechoice to smoke. [/B]

It is 18 here and by then they are considered adults so I wont have a say. While on that note I will try to teach them the do's and don'ts of many things. They will not be allowed to smoke in my home. I don't want them to smoke but that will be their choice. As kids under 18 they will not be able to smoke but that is why I am the parent and they are the kid. My kids will do many stupid things that could threaten their lives I will do my best to teach them why something could be harmfull or in the case of smoking a waste of money. As adults my kids should have learned enough to make their own choices as adults and they should be allowed the freedoms to do so. I do not want a coporation or government agency taking freedoms away from my kids just because some rich a** says it doesn't suit his life stlye. Many of my family have/are vets from WW1 up through now. They have stood for this country and the right to be free, and as long as something is legal then it should be everyones choice what to do, not some hot shot with a million dollars behind his name. This is why I started the other thread if you are so against smoking then lets do something about making it illegal, otherwise except what the majority wants and live with it.

Originally posted by LionelHutz
Of course they're spending way more time standing around outside while everyone else is working.

That was not my point behind the post :rolleyes: but you knew that. I do agree with you Lionel, nothing pisses me of more then the smokers that get the extra 5-10min. break because they have to smoke. With that said though that is a job related malfunction maybe the boss should open his eyes unless of course he is out smoking with them. With that problem there are many others that go with it the talkers the ones that need to use the bathroom every 5 min. etc... Another thing that sucks are the door smokers. Up here there is no more smoking in eating places so everyone gathers just outside the front door. I don't know which was/is worse having the smoker sit in a certiain area where there were fans to pull the smoke out of a room or finish eating and walk outside into a wall of smoke.

Originally posted by LionelHutz
Of course they're spending way more time standing around outside while everyone else is working.

yeah that is sooooooooooooo irritating. I remember a time when I just smoked at my desk. Just lit one up in the morning and kept her burning all day.... :D

Hell I can not believe we actually did that...

At work now the only ones who ever really take a break are the smokers... have to get their coats and boots on, grab their lighters etc, make their way outside.... Wonder what that adds up to per year?

when they stopped the smokers from smoking inside I allways liked the guy that quit. He still figured out how to get that long break though. He would bring the News paper/mag in with him and go to the restroom and read it for up 45 min. a couple of times. I quess whether someone smokes or not if they are the type that likes to pull sh** they'll find away.