- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: U-Haul publicly announces hiring discrimination against nicotine users
Posted on 1/2/20 at 8:00 am to Rouge
Posted on 1/2/20 at 8:00 am to Rouge
Several years back a city said they wouldn’t allow members of their police or fire department to smoke on or off duty. If I remember correctly it held up in court.
1
Posted on 1/2/20 at 8:01 am to Rouge
quote:
Rouge
There is an unattractive tone in your posting this morning. I would suggest you step outside on the back patio and smoke you a Kool menthol.
How different is this than the NFL testing for marijuana when it's legal in a few of the states where the NFL players work?
This post was edited on 1/2/20 at 8:09 am
Posted on 1/2/20 at 8:03 am to TimeOutdoors
quote:
Several years back a city said they wouldn’t allow members of their police or fire department to smoke on or off duty. If I remember correctly it held up in court.
The government has more hurdles to jump through in justifying things like this than private business. But connecting this policy to physical standards for emergency personnel would not be a tough case in 2019.
May be a bad policy if your goal is to increase hiring, though.
Eta: 2020**
This post was edited on 1/2/20 at 8:06 am
Posted on 1/2/20 at 8:03 am to Rouge
When smokers believe they are a protected class. 
Is this something y'all cooked up during the 15 minutes out of every hour you spend smoking outside?
Is this something y'all cooked up during the 15 minutes out of every hour you spend smoking outside? 
Posted on 1/2/20 at 8:06 am to tLSU
Actually there is a statute in Louisiana that prohibits adverse employment action based upon the fact that the employee smokes
Posted on 1/2/20 at 8:07 am to Rouge
It's simply the opposite of healthcare organizations making flu vaccinations mandatory. U-Haul is just beating a different dead horse.
My hope is they get an insect infestation in their truck fleet since nicotine is a safe for humans but deadly to insects substance.
My hope is they get an insect infestation in their truck fleet since nicotine is a safe for humans but deadly to insects substance.
Posted on 1/2/20 at 8:07 am to Barrister
quote:
Actually there is a statute in Louisiana that prohibits adverse employment action based upon the fact that the employee smokes
of course there is. Our legislature is the gift that keeps on giving Posted on 1/2/20 at 8:08 am to Rouge
Where exactly did you get your law degree from? Which law precludes discrimination against nicotine users?
Posted on 1/2/20 at 8:09 am to HotKoolaid
quote:
Depending on their testing threshold It could be possible to have a cigar on Friday night and lose your job on Monday morning.
Then quit smoking.
Posted on 1/2/20 at 8:09 am to Barrister
quote:
Actually there is a statute in Louisiana that prohibits adverse employment action based upon the fact that the employee smokes
Well there's a reason it's not a 50-state policy.
Posted on 1/2/20 at 8:13 am to Rouge
quote:
This just seems primed for a nice lawsuit.
Nah.
quote:
I don't see how a company can ban the use of a federally legal product.
Show me this in the constitution.
Posted on 1/2/20 at 8:13 am to Rouge
We are hoping to implement a new policy where we stop hiring stoopid people.
Posted on 1/2/20 at 8:15 am to Rouge
Smokers are not a protected class.
Posted on 1/2/20 at 8:15 am to tLSU
the point that I'm trying to get across is that policies like this are a slippery slope. It's all fun and games until your company decides to start implementing policies that restrict things that you enjoy.
Posted on 1/2/20 at 8:17 am to Rouge
This will continue. The company I work for checks blood work. If it finds nicotine metabolites in the blood you pay more for health insurance.
Posted on 1/2/20 at 8:21 am to Rouge
quote:
That seems like textbook discrimination.
What textbooks have you been reading?
Posted on 1/2/20 at 8:23 am to Barrister
quote:
Actually there is a statute in Louisiana that prohibits adverse employment action based upon the fact that the employee smokes
Yep, we ran into that a few years ago. The owner wanted to ban the hiring of smokers, because they make bad decisions. We ran it up the chain with our attorney, and this is essentially what he said.
The owner then asked if we could bad smoking on the premises; i.e., make the smoking employees smoke in the street.
Posted on 1/2/20 at 8:24 am to Rouge
quote:
It's all fun and games until your company decides to start implementing policies that restrict things that you enjoy.
Then don’t work there. As long as it’s legal, then a company can NOT hire you, or fire you, for any reason they want.
Posted on 1/2/20 at 8:24 am to LSUFAITHFUL
There is no need for 19 breaks a day if you just sneak a hit off your vape every now and then. I know, it's douchey but if you don't make a big production of the smoke cloud and/or step away from your desk to get a hit then there is no affect whatsoever on your production or co-workers. You don't stink, you don't take breaks, etc.
Posted on 1/2/20 at 8:25 am to Legion of Doom
quote:
This will continue. The company I work for checks blood work. If it finds nicotine metabolites in the blood you pay more for health insurance.
Agreed. Employers are restricted on things like age discrimination (older people are far more expensive to insure) so they will find ways to control or influence behavior in other ways so that they can lower or control health insurance costs.
Page 3 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News