CNN lady: But some people quit smoking to keep their jobs. Isn't that good?

Guy she was interviewing about some employer firing people who refuse to quit smoking says:

"Yes Carol that is true, but there are also some women who have to sleep with their bosses to keep their jobs. Is that good too?"

CNNs Carol Lin: "Oh..."

Whoopsie! End of that interview.

Don

:eyes:

in response to the issue, if you applied for the job at the time that this rule was in effect, and was notified of this rule.... tough luck either quit or start looking for another job. i don't have a drivers license, would a taxi company hire me under my current condition? probably not. if i loose my license off the job... i would also loose the job for not being able to work. if every night someone got hammered and their activities effected their health the next morning (hang over) I'm pretty sure the boss would get tired of it, same for someone who is coughing all the time, or is starting to get health problems from their habits. id give like a limit to the rule though like as long as your not a frequent smoker, a cigar in celebration of a family members birth or something like that is alright, just like drinking every once in a while just to loosing up or celebrate something, but if you make that activity a habit, and that is effecting your job..... your employment should be in question

Should your boss be able to not allow his employees to eat junk food?

How about going skiing. That can be pretty dangerous too.

Bearing children can lead to complications also. Is a no kids rule alright?

Because that is what is coming next.

Don

happen to see the story earlier? I believe it's Weyco (?) - the old man owner also said he was going to start drug testing spouses of his workers next year. Wonder how much of the property settlement he's willing to come with?

An employee of his who did quit smoking to keep her job looked to me like she might cost the old bird a buck or two with weight-related problems shortly.

As for all the poor souls moaning about paying for someone else's bad habits - wake up - everybody's got at least one. Jim Fixx's was running. Meanwhile the insurance company loves to keep you focused on anything that obfuscates their gouging on premiums. National health insurance would lower those premiums...and their obscene profits.

leave slippery slopes to sledders skiers and snowboarders

are trying not to cover motorcycling.

im biased agenst smoking because of how it effects the people close to me. i wouldnt support a full ban on the activaty..... but the laws i would support would seem radicle to some people(not smoking within a certain distance of public building, to prevent that stinky drift, for example)

...maybe if the person admitted they were hooked on coffee you'd hire them but not even for some jobs (like diamond cutter?)

Fact is as much as i want to live and let live, there is not way i'd hire an addict but somehow i'm expected to let them have up to 45 minutes a day out on smoke breaks. At least the needle junkie only shoots up once a day at work!!

I work at a Rock and Roll kind of company and have taken to hanging around the smokers at the dumpster out back 'cause I've figured out it's the only way to get a promotion. Should i have to watch people tie off or kill a bong just to get a raise?

Fact is when you transpose the drug or even the compulsion it adds up to preferential treatment for cigarette junkies.

for the "what's next".

Dictating that smoking is not tolerated, while employees drink, gorge themselves on garbage and swill sodas all day is stupid. :)

... affects one's job?

I am a court reporter, and a smoker. We court reporters have deadlines to meet that would boggle your mind. We are very often called upon to produce a hundred and fifty pages of transcripts of court testimony (which, of course, must be proofread for COMPLETE accuracy) in as little as twelve hours.

The vast majority of court reporters I work with are smokers. By your logic, smoking SHOULD BE MANDATORY for our job.

Now, does that make any sense to you?

"Is the boss cute?" :P

thats just like the "can a guy be raped" argument right there

hospital costs for addictive substances... i think not

if tobacco deaths were child's toy deaths ......

hell if a new cars seatbelt caused 10 pinched fingers that bled they'd be recalled..

it all ends up being campaign contributions and fascist pressure to elect someone who wont do anything about it.

Some guy got a lead foot and get a lot of tickets while driving fire him. I am not paying his medical bills when he wraps his car around a tree.

Someone want to hunt? Fire them before they accidentally shoot themselves and I have to pay for their medical bills.

I knew a guy who killed himself while riding a bike. He was in a coma for months before he died. Huge medical bills. Fire all bike riders too. I am not going to pay for their medial care after they crash.

Don

...for gay people to pay taxes which support families when they themselves cannot legally adopt, foster children, get rejected by IVF doctors a lot, and certainly marry to form their own family? I think not!

I am sure you get the picture. We all pay out for things that we might see as being unfair. But part of being a good leftie is paying those things without ever complaining. At least we know that money is going to help another person.

If the U.S. had anything resembling a proper functioning healthcare system you wouldn't be burdened by high premiums that have to cover UNINSURED people who are forced to the ER for the flu.

should I have to pay real estate taxes when I have no children, never did and never will in the school system?

that's how they hook people into supporting invasive rules and laws...appeal to their greed...."not me, I'm not paying for _____(fill in the blank).

And I am tired of some people thinking they are the only ones who pay out for other people. They aren't. I'm not American so I can't speak for myself, but I can certainly speak for my partner who is. And she has had to pay taxes to send other peoples kids to school and for what? She can't have a family of her own.

Same is said for straight couples who don't have kids. They continue to pay to send other peoples kids to school.

By the way parents. I am in Australia, realize we have a lot better social structure than you guys. I a all for paying out to help other people. I am merely using this as a point.

Well put.

We're a barbaric nation for allowing people who need medical care to die if they're not rich enough.

She's ditsy and brainless-- a really poor excuse for a TV journalist.

... is a pre-requsite for getting an on-air job at CNN these days.

She always throws questions like she's asking about macrame versus beaded angels for your Christmas tree, but whoever's booking guests for her gets steely-eyed no-nonsense types who tell it like it is. Immense mismatch.

well done :)

and that's a pity

journalists show their stupidity. Maybe after awhile the networks head honchos will start hiring folks with brains.

his response was priceless and he was dead serious. These fugging popinjays are beyond willing to march to the beat of the fascists. Still I did wonder if the owner is as concerned about the chemicals he exposes his workers to in that miracle gro place. One more product to boycott. They sure make life easy for me.

Edit sp.

Christ now I've heard everything. No way you could ever get me to work for a company that thinks it can dictate what you can do when you are not on the clock. I can't believe there were actually a couple posts trying to defend this :eyes: No matter what you think of smokers, this is a doorway to someplace you don't want to go. Next it'll be no Liberals.

http://john.hoke.org/index/asylum/comments/workers_lose_jobs_over_smoking_ban/

Still no boss is telling me what I can do on my time.

They're following Weyco's "example"

THe MiracleGro guy was on some TV show on Friday yabbing about it. I thought the same thing---gee, smoking is bad, but working around, you know, CHEMICALS is okeedokee. Hmmm....

wondered if I was hearing wrong but both of them are doing it.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x5569868

His comeback was totally inappropriate. Not sure who Carol Lin is, but it IS a good thing when someone stops smoking. And the fact that they got to keep their job is just the icing on the cake.

How about your boss told you that neither you or your wife can no longer have any more alcohol if you want to keep your job? Not because you or your wife were abusing alcohol but just because some people do and the chance is there that you might? How would you feel about that? Would that be a good thing?

Don

Some doctors say that a drink a day is good for you. A cigarette a day is NEVER good for you, or anyone around you. Even when the cigarette light is out, smokers still reek of smoke.

He has smoked for over 40 years and can't smoke throughout the day because his patients will smell it on his breath. He has one cigarette after his dinner every evening. You think he is going to die from smoking?

Don

I recall that in last week's smoking ban flamefest that a number of smokers loudly proclaimed that non-smokers who worked in a place that allowed smoking should just get another job. So riddle me this - why can't the smokers who work at Scott's just get another job?

I don't recall any smoking ban flamefest last week. Perhaps I missed it?

As for getting another job should that go for people who drink alcohol at home too?

Just curious how far you want to push this.

Don

It's for all the smokers who made that sort of statement a few days ago. If you missed the flamefest then count yourself lucky! :D

Scott's is going beyond a smoke-free atmosphere and telling people what they can or cannot do in their own homes, or anywhere else that has nothing to do with their workplace.

If Scott's was merely talking about going smoke-free, I'd agree with you.

... stop smoking or the employee will be terminated. That's the plan Weyco founder Howard Weyers told about in an interview this week.

Do y'all suppose he'd accept a divorce in lieu of the employee convincing their spouse to stop smoking? :eyes:

it is about CONTROL. "First they came for the smokers." It is about big business controlling your personal decisions about your private life. Big business will not rest until they control every facet of our lives in order to improve their bottom line.

So, is it more important to have personal choices (even to smoke or eat junk food or drive fast) in our private lives or to participate in increasing the bottom-line profits for big business? Like big-business, do we put $$ before personal choices in our private lives? It is akin to supporting the Patriot Act --- are you willing to give up certain liberties for the "security of our country?" I'm not.

I'm not talking about smoking at work or in public places where it affects the health of others. I'm talking about having the freedom to make choices, even if they are "wrong," in our private lives. If we had universal health care, this would probably STILL be an issue, because the more big-business can control our private decisions, the more they add to their bottom-line.

Anyhoo, when people say, "I don't want to pay $$ for others' bad habits," please know you are PAYING in another way...you are paying with your right to make choices in your private lives. How soon will workers be required to attend regular church services (it is already happening)....because church goers are more supportive of submission to authority? It will happen to you too, sooner or later. If we allow business to chip away at our rights in our private lives, they will end up with a nation of Stepford Workers, which is what they want anyway.

We need to keep big business and gov't out of our private lives, whatever the $$ cost.

(it is already happening)..."

Would you please provide a link, or more info that can aid in searching this requirement?

on the smoking issue....it was a mention within the story....or was it MSNBC...anyway, it was mentioned on TV. We already know what certain "Christian businesses" hire only "Christian" workers, advertise that they are "Christian" enterprises (so, one can infer they don't hire Muslim or Jewish or non-Christian employees.)

Do you know if "the rules" only apply to government hiring?

I saw mention of the fact that, for instance, a private Catholic school could hire only Catholics if it wished.

I hadn't considered the old cliche, "I didn't see you in church," had actually been given teeth by certain companies, but I guess it is an (il)logical next step.

:evilgrin: Now, let me finish my expense report. How many drinks did I have with lunch again? :eyes: (We sure got that customer sloshed!)