Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
Iloveboeing
Topic Author
Posts: 466
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2005 11:02 am

U-Haul Won't Hire Smokers (In Some States)

Thu Jan 02, 2020 10:58 pm

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/01/02/busi ... index.html

This is excellent to see a major business supporting stamping smoking out of the workforce. I'd to see Missouri allow this, but it's not currently on the list. Smoking is an addictive, disgusting and degenerative habit that must be eliminated. I look forward to seeing our country and our world go further in getting rid of these awful habits.
 
dmg626
Posts: 408
Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2015 3:47 pm

Re: U-Haul Won't Hire Smokers (In Some States)

Thu Jan 02, 2020 11:11 pm

If they’re truly doing this for the employees health then next should be no alcohol consumption, no red meat consumption and no overweight people need apply
 
Iloveboeing
Topic Author
Posts: 466
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2005 11:02 am

Re: U-Haul Won't Hire Smokers (In Some States)

Thu Jan 02, 2020 11:31 pm

dmg626 wrote:
If they’re truly doing this for the employees health then next should be no alcohol consumption, no red meat consumption and no overweight people need apply


Yes, EXACTLY ! That's where it eventually needs to end up.
 
DDR
Posts: 1731
Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2013 11:09 pm

Re: U-Haul Won't Hire Smokers (In Some States)

Fri Jan 03, 2020 12:57 am

Alaska Airlines does not hire smokers as well.
 
Airstud
Posts: 4887
Joined: Wed Nov 29, 2000 11:57 am

Re: U-Haul Won't Hire Smokers (In Some States)

Fri Jan 03, 2020 1:13 am

Smoking is gross*.

Twenty-eight years now since I last had a cigarette.






*gross
Pancakes are delicious.
 
TSS
Posts: 3658
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2006 3:52 pm

Re: U-Haul Won't Hire Smokers (In Some States)

Fri Jan 03, 2020 3:31 am

dmg626 wrote:
If they’re truly doing this for the employees health then next should be no alcohol consumption, no red meat consumption and no overweight people need apply


Also: No skydivers, no rock climbers, no skiers (snow OR water), and no motorcycle riders. Heck, better not hire anyone with a private pilot's license either... can't be too careful, you know.

As long as they're minimizing health risks, why not just have all applicants submit their DNA for a full "23 And Me" panel to see what unknown health problems they might be genetically inclined towards and then refuse to hire some applicants based on that? Better safe than sorry, right?
Able to kill active threads stone dead with a single post!
 
Jetty
Posts: 1286
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2015 12:27 pm

Re: U-Haul Won't Hire Smokers (In Some States)

Fri Jan 03, 2020 3:49 am

TSS wrote:
dmg626 wrote:
If they’re truly doing this for the employees health then next should be no alcohol consumption, no red meat consumption and no overweight people need apply


Also: No skydivers, no rock climbers, no skiers (snow OR water), and no motorcycle riders. Heck, better not hire anyone with a private pilot's license either... can't be too careful, you know.

Then no people flying on Boeing MAX airplanes either, that’s also a safety risk.
 
User avatar
Francoflier
Posts: 5369
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2001 12:27 pm

Re: U-Haul Won't Hire Smokers (In Some States)

Fri Jan 03, 2020 5:56 am

I wonder whether this is purely a health driven policy or if it has to do with negotiating a better healthcare plan for their employees. Non-smokers are cheaper to ensure than smokers...

I am against discrimination on the basis of habits alone, however unhealthy they might be, but I am all for those who follow those habits paying for the consequences rather than imposing them on the rest of society.

There is also the inherent (and unfair) lack of productivity of smokers who have to take several smoke breaks during the day to feed their addiction.
Last edited by Francoflier on Fri Jan 03, 2020 6:02 am, edited 2 times in total.
I'll do my own airline. With Blackjack. And hookers. In fact, forget the airline.
 
Kiwirob
Posts: 12968
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 2:16 pm

Re: U-Haul Won't Hire Smokers (In Some States)

Fri Jan 03, 2020 5:59 am

I can’t believe that’s allowed, talk about a slippery slop policy.
 
tommy1808
Posts: 13254
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: U-Haul Won't Hire Smokers (In Some States)

Fri Jan 03, 2020 6:07 am

TSS wrote:
dmg626 wrote:
If they’re truly doing this for the employees health then next should be no alcohol consumption, no red meat consumption and no overweight people need apply


Also: No skydivers, no rock climbers, no skiers (snow OR water), and no motorcycle riders. Heck, better not hire anyone with a private pilot's license either... can't be too careful, you know.

As long as they're minimizing health risks, why not just have all applicants submit their DNA for a full "23 And Me" panel to see what unknown health problems they might be genetically inclined towards and then refuse to hire some applicants based on that? Better safe than sorry, right?


:checkmark: :checkmark: :checkmark: :checkmark: :checkmark: :checkmark: :checkmark: :checkmark:

Its flat out ridiculous...

Iloveboeing wrote:
dmg626 wrote:
If they’re truly doing this for the employees health then next should be no alcohol consumption, no red meat consumption and no overweight people need apply


Yes, EXACTLY ! That's where it eventually needs to end up.


Because nothing says "land of the free" more than your employer regulating every aspect of your life. Your employer decides what you do 40 hours a week, beyond that he on only gets a say in fringe activities and nothing else. Smoking may be the least healthy free time activity of them all, but its far from the only risk to your health you have.

I work to live a life and enjoying it, i am not alive to work.

Whats Next, banning 90% of the Planet for traveling because it is more risky there than at home? Heck, i wouldn´t be allowed to have a US vacation ever again......

Gosh, i am glad to live in a place where my boss essentially can´t tell me anything about my free time, and only very limited even at work (can´t impose a dresscode or hairstyle for example).

best regards
Thomas
Well, there is prophecy in the bible after all: 2 Timothy 3:1-6
 
ArchGuy1
Posts: 1506
Joined: Wed Jul 10, 2019 11:35 pm

Re: U-Haul Won't Hire Smokers (In Some States)

Fri Jan 03, 2020 6:23 am

tommy1808 wrote:
TSS wrote:
dmg626 wrote:
If they’re truly doing this for the employees health then next should be no alcohol consumption, no red meat consumption and no overweight people need apply


Also: No skydivers, no rock climbers, no skiers (snow OR water), and no motorcycle riders. Heck, better not hire anyone with a private pilot's license either... can't be too careful, you know.

As long as they're minimizing health risks, why not just have all applicants submit their DNA for a full "23 And Me" panel to see what unknown health problems they might be genetically inclined towards and then refuse to hire some applicants based on that? Better safe than sorry, right?


:checkmark: :checkmark: :checkmark: :checkmark: :checkmark: :checkmark: :checkmark: :checkmark:

Its flat out ridiculous...

Iloveboeing wrote:
dmg626 wrote:
If they’re truly doing this for the employees health then next should be no alcohol consumption, no red meat consumption and no overweight people need apply


Yes, EXACTLY ! That's where it eventually needs to end up.


Because nothing says "land of the free" more than your employer regulating every aspect of your life. Your employer decides what you do 40 hours a week, beyond that he on only gets a say in fringe activities and nothing else. Smoking may be the least healthy free time activity of them all, but its far from the only risk to your health you have.

I work to live a life and enjoying it, i am not alive to work.

Whats Next, banning 90% of the Planet for traveling because it is more risky there than at home? Heck, i wouldn´t be allowed to have a US vacation ever again......

Gosh, i am glad to live in a place where my boss essentially can´t tell me anything about my free time, and only very limited even at work (can´t impose a dresscode or hairstyle for example).

best regards
Thomas

What country do you live in.
 
tommy1808
Posts: 13254
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: U-Haul Won't Hire Smokers (In Some States)

Fri Jan 03, 2020 6:30 am

ArchGuy1 wrote:
tommy1808 wrote:
TSS wrote:

Also: No skydivers, no rock climbers, no skiers (snow OR water), and no motorcycle riders. Heck, better not hire anyone with a private pilot's license either... can't be too careful, you know.

As long as they're minimizing health risks, why not just have all applicants submit their DNA for a full "23 And Me" panel to see what unknown health problems they might be genetically inclined towards and then refuse to hire some applicants based on that? Better safe than sorry, right?


:checkmark: :checkmark: :checkmark: :checkmark: :checkmark: :checkmark: :checkmark: :checkmark:

Its flat out ridiculous...

Iloveboeing wrote:

Yes, EXACTLY ! That's where it eventually needs to end up.


Because nothing says "land of the free" more than your employer regulating every aspect of your life. Your employer decides what you do 40 hours a week, beyond that he on only gets a say in fringe activities and nothing else. Smoking may be the least healthy free time activity of them all, but its far from the only risk to your health you have.

I work to live a life and enjoying it, i am not alive to work.

Whats Next, banning 90% of the Planet for traveling because it is more risky there than at home? Heck, i wouldn´t be allowed to have a US vacation ever again......

Gosh, i am glad to live in a place where my boss essentially can´t tell me anything about my free time, and only very limited even at work (can´t impose a dresscode or hairstyle for example).

best regards
Thomas

What country do you live in.


Germany
Well, there is prophecy in the bible after all: 2 Timothy 3:1-6
 
User avatar
fr8mech
Posts: 8061
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 9:00 am

Re: U-Haul Won't Hire Smokers (In Some States)

Fri Jan 03, 2020 6:48 am

Quite simply, the proper way to handle this is to index the complany provided health insurance premiums to risky life styles.

Smoke? Pay more in premiums.
Scuba? Pay more in premiums.
Own firearms? Pay more in premiums.
Obese? Pay more in premiums.
etc., etc., etc...

With current technology and actuarial tables, I suspect that setting premiums commensurate with lifestyle should be easy. My guess is that health care insurance would be less expensive, on average if premiums were adjusted for high-risk lifestyles.

Just my $0.02.

If I smoked, my insurance would cost me ~$200.00 per month more. I certify every year that I do not smoke during enrollment.
When seconds count, the police are minutes away, or may not come at all.
It’s hard to win an argument with a smart person, but it’s damn near impossible to win an argument with a stupid person. ~B. Murray
Ego Bibere Capulus, Ut Aliis Sit Vivere
 
tommy1808
Posts: 13254
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: U-Haul Won't Hire Smokers (In Some States)

Fri Jan 03, 2020 7:15 am

fr8mech wrote:
Quite simply, the proper way to handle this is to index the complany provided health insurance premiums to risky life styles.


There is nothing simple about that........ if you want to make it easy:

Smoke?


Tabacco companies pay the insurances the extra cost and raise prices accordingly

Scuba? Pay more in premiums.

Scuba gear etc companies pay the insurances the extra cost and raise prices accordingly

Own firearms? Pay more in premiums.


Gun companies pay the insurances the extra cost and raise prices accordingly.

Obese? Pay more in premiums.


that is more difficult..... i would go for added sugar as price driver...
etc., etc., etc...

With current technology and actuarial tables, I suspect that setting premiums commensurate with lifestyle should be easy. My guess is that health care insurance would be less expensive, on average if premiums were adjusted for high-risk lifestyles.


Plenty of time will be spend in courts, if there is something you don´t wanne push, its new ways for insurances to refuse coverage.

best regards
Thomas
Well, there is prophecy in the bible after all: 2 Timothy 3:1-6
 
User avatar
fr8mech
Posts: 8061
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 9:00 am

Re: U-Haul Won't Hire Smokers (In Some States)

Fri Jan 03, 2020 7:20 am

tommy1808 wrote:
fr8mech wrote:
Quite simply, the proper way to handle this is to index the complany provided health insurance premiums to risky life styles.


There is nothing simple about that........ if you want to make it easy:

Smoke?


Tabacco companies pay the insurances the extra cost and raise prices accordingly

Scuba? Pay more in premiums.

Scuba gear etc companies pay the insurances the extra cost and raise prices accordingly

Own firearms? Pay more in premiums.


Gun companies pay the insurances the extra cost and raise prices accordingly.

Obese? Pay more in premiums.


that is more difficult..... i would go for added sugar as price driver...
etc., etc., etc...

With current technology and actuarial tables, I suspect that setting premiums commensurate with lifestyle should be easy. My guess is that health care insurance would be less expensive, on average if premiums were adjusted for high-risk lifestyles.


Plenty of time will be spend in courts, if there is something you don´t wanne push, its new ways for insurances to refuse coverage.

best regards
Thomas


So, you're not a believer in personal responsibility? Everyone's fault but the person performing the activity?

If I choose to partake in a risky activity, then I should be responsible to absorb any potential costs in my future healthcare.
When seconds count, the police are minutes away, or may not come at all.
It’s hard to win an argument with a smart person, but it’s damn near impossible to win an argument with a stupid person. ~B. Murray
Ego Bibere Capulus, Ut Aliis Sit Vivere
 
tommy1808
Posts: 13254
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: U-Haul Won't Hire Smokers (In Some States)

Fri Jan 03, 2020 7:32 am

fr8mech wrote:
tommy1808 wrote:
fr8mech wrote:
Quite simply, the proper way to handle this is to index the complany provided health insurance premiums to risky life styles.


There is nothing simple about that........ if you want to make it easy:

Smoke?


Tabacco companies pay the insurances the extra cost and raise prices accordingly

Scuba? Pay more in premiums.

Scuba gear etc companies pay the insurances the extra cost and raise prices accordingly

Own firearms? Pay more in premiums.


Gun companies pay the insurances the extra cost and raise prices accordingly.

Obese? Pay more in premiums.


that is more difficult..... i would go for added sugar as price driver...
etc., etc., etc...

With current technology and actuarial tables, I suspect that setting premiums commensurate with lifestyle should be easy. My guess is that health care insurance would be less expensive, on average if premiums were adjusted for high-risk lifestyles.


Plenty of time will be spend in courts, if there is something you don´t wanne push, its new ways for insurances to refuse coverage.

best regards
Thomas


So, you're not a believer in personal responsibility? Everyone's fault but the person performing the activity?

If I choose to partake in a risky activity, then I should be responsible to absorb any potential costs in my future healthcare.


I don't see any difference between both approaches with regards to personal responsibility as you pay for the additional risk in both cases, only without the chance of insurances trying to deny coverage.

Best regards
Thomas
Well, there is prophecy in the bible after all: 2 Timothy 3:1-6
 
alfa164
Posts: 3613
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 2:47 am

Re: U-Haul Won't Hire Smokers (In Some States)

Fri Jan 03, 2020 8:30 am

tommy1808 wrote:
Because nothing says "land of the free" more than your employer regulating every aspect of your life. Your employer decides what you do 40 hours a week, beyond that he on only gets a say in fringe activities and nothing else. Smoking may be the least healthy free time activity of them all, but its far from the only risk to your health you have.


Actually, nothing says "land of the free" more than allowing an employer to hire people who will not be an unnecessary burden on the company - and its employees - as a whole. The employer isn't deciding what you do with your life; the employee must decide whether he is capable of working for a company with rules - not much different than rules against drug use, for that matter - the company feels are necessary and beneficial to maintain a quality workforce.

All employers have standards. This one should not come as a shock to anyone.
I'm going to have a smokin' hot body again!
I have decided to be cremated....
 
tommy1808
Posts: 13254
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: U-Haul Won't Hire Smokers (In Some States)

Fri Jan 03, 2020 8:44 am

alfa164 wrote:
All employers have standards. This one should not come as a shock to anyone.


They can have all the standards they want *at* work. If you want to tell me what i can and can´t do during the other 128 hours of the week, you better start paying me for 168 hours. That is the norm, whenever my employer wants to be able to order me to do anything, he has to pay me. If i sleep at home in my bed, but i am on standby, my boss needs to pay me....

That they have standards isn´t shocking, that they can enforce them is. Well, i guess there are reasons that US companies get burned at the stake by courts so regularly here.

Just ask Walmart, another US company that acts like it owns its employees, how that works. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/why-did- ... r_b_940542

the company feels are necessary and beneficial to maintain a quality workforce.


If a company feels an employee doesn´t perform the remedy is firing them. Its not telling every employee how they have to live their life.

best regards
Thomas
Well, there is prophecy in the bible after all: 2 Timothy 3:1-6
 
alfa164
Posts: 3613
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 2:47 am

Re: U-Haul Won't Hire Smokers (In Some States)

Fri Jan 03, 2020 9:15 am

tommy1808 wrote:
If a company feels an employee doesn´t perform the remedy is firing them. Its not telling every employee how they have to live their life.


Are you totally missing the point here? They aren't firing anyone, and they aren't telling any employee how to live their life.

They are choosing not to hire people with a desultory habit - as should be their right.
I'm going to have a smokin' hot body again!
I have decided to be cremated....
 
tommy1808
Posts: 13254
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: U-Haul Won't Hire Smokers (In Some States)

Fri Jan 03, 2020 9:29 am

alfa164 wrote:
tommy1808 wrote:
If a company feels an employee doesn´t perform the remedy is firing them. Its not telling every employee how they have to live their life.


Are you totally missing the point here? They aren't firing anyone.


Ah, so they can start as non-smokers, start smoking and won´t be fired. Now that is cute if true.

They are choosing not to hire people with a desultory habit - as should be their right.


Nope, it shouldn´t be. Only what effects work performance demonstrable shall count. Smoking doesn´t, as disgusting as it is.

best regards
Thomas
Well, there is prophecy in the bible after all: 2 Timothy 3:1-6
 
alfa164
Posts: 3613
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 2:47 am

Re: U-Haul Won't Hire Smokers (In Some States)

Fri Jan 03, 2020 9:47 am

tommy1808 wrote:
They are choosing not to hire people with a desultory habit - as should be their right.

Nope, it shouldn´t be. Only what effects work performance demonstrable shall count. Smoking doesn´t, as disgusting as it is.


Ahh... but it does. Statistics bear out the increased burden smokers put on companies' productivity, insurance rates, and medical costs.

Put this on the other foot: you are saying employers should be forced to hire someone they know will be an unnecessary burden on the company?
I'm going to have a smokin' hot body again!
I have decided to be cremated....
 
tommy1808
Posts: 13254
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: U-Haul Won't Hire Smokers (In Some States)

Fri Jan 03, 2020 10:35 am

alfa164 wrote:
tommy1808 wrote:
They are choosing not to hire people with a desultory habit - as should be their right.

Nope, it shouldn´t be. Only what effects work performance demonstrable shall count. Smoking doesn´t, as disgusting as it is.


Ahh... but it does. Statistics bear out the increased burden smokers put on companies' productivity, insurance rates, and medical costs.


a) they bear that out statistically on average, not for the individual applicant.
b) the same is in large part true for former smokers, so smoker/non-smoker isn´t the deciding factor.

Glancing over a hand full of studies "smoker" for the purpose of them is someone with significant tobacco consumption on or close to a pack/day. If you smoke a few on the weekends, you are smoker, they won´t hire you, and i would challenge you to proof that a low count smoker that lives an otherwise healthy life, i know smokers that run marathons, is less healthy and productive than a non-smoking couch potato.

There is a shitton of stuff that statistically has adverse effects, and that people could decide to abstain from. "Oh, we don´t mind that you are gay, but unless you are abstinent it statistically...... ", "Uh, we don´t mind fat people, but unless your BMI is 23 or less we won´t hire you, because statistically". Prescription drug use is also a personal risk factor with those statistical effects. There is so freaking much that is demonstrated statistically, yet is unacceptable as reasoning for placement. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3487655/

Put this on the other foot: you are saying employers should be forced to hire someone they know will be an unnecessary burden on the company?


Unless they can proof that hiring *that* person would be a burden to the company they absolutely should be forced to hire them, unless a better qualified candidate is available. Or not hire anyone at all.

Companies should generally, and luckily they are in many places, be banned from making employment decisions based on prospect employees doing something perfectly legal in their free time.

best regards
Thomas
Well, there is prophecy in the bible after all: 2 Timothy 3:1-6
 
rlwynn
Posts: 1499
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2000 3:35 am

Re: U-Haul Won't Hire Smokers (In Some States)

Fri Jan 03, 2020 10:51 am

Here in Germany I would laugh at my employer if they said I had to take a drug test. I do not even think that is legal here.
I can drive faster than you
 
tommy1808
Posts: 13254
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: U-Haul Won't Hire Smokers (In Some States)

Fri Jan 03, 2020 11:16 am

rlwynn wrote:
I do not even think that is legal here.


its not, unless there is a specific reason why that is important in that particular job to be drug free* and there is an agreement between the employer and the works committee (Betriebsrat) allowing such testing and the employee releases the doctor from his/her confidentiality, unless the condition is a clear and present workplace problem (i.e. drug traces in your blood/urine don´t count, unless you are too intoxicated to do your job).

best regards
Thomas

*"Drug free" does not necessarily mean "no trace of drugs"
Well, there is prophecy in the bible after all: 2 Timothy 3:1-6
 
Redd
Posts: 1267
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2013 3:40 am

Re: U-Haul Won't Hire Smokers (In Some States)

Fri Jan 03, 2020 11:31 am

tommy1808 wrote:

Nope, it shouldn´t be. Only what effects work performance demonstrable shall count. Smoking doesn´t, as disgusting as it is.

best regards
Thomas


There's lots of literature on this topic. Smokers are quite a bit less productive than non-smokers.
 
Kiwirob
Posts: 12968
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 2:16 pm

Re: U-Haul Won't Hire Smokers (In Some States)

Fri Jan 03, 2020 11:46 am

alfa164 wrote:
tommy1808 wrote:
If a company feels an employee doesn´t perform the remedy is firing them. Its not telling every employee how they have to live their life.


Are you totally missing the point here? They aren't firing anyone, and they aren't telling any employee how to live their life.

They are choosing not to hire people with a desultory habit - as should be their right.


They are discriminating when they hire, it's no different than an employer not hiring you because you're coloured or are christian or have blue eyes or are female. In Norway an employer wouldn't be able to ask you if you smoked, if they tried to remove you because you smoked that would also be illegal. I had a interview a couple of weeks ago, one of the questions asked was if I was intending to have any more children and if I was going on dad leave, this was asked by the German CEO, the Norwegian HR manager wasn't happy with the question and told me not to answer, that type of question is illegal in Norway. I answered anyway, and got the job.
 
Kiwirob
Posts: 12968
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 2:16 pm

Re: U-Haul Won't Hire Smokers (In Some States)

Fri Jan 03, 2020 11:47 am

Redd wrote:
tommy1808 wrote:

Nope, it shouldn´t be. Only what effects work performance demonstrable shall count. Smoking doesn´t, as disgusting as it is.

best regards
Thomas


There's lots of literature on this topic. Smokers are quite a bit less productive than non-smokers.


So are pregnant women but you can't discriminate against them.
 
Kiwirob
Posts: 12968
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 2:16 pm

Re: U-Haul Won't Hire Smokers (In Some States)

Fri Jan 03, 2020 11:50 am

alfa164 wrote:
Put this on the other foot: you are saying employers should be forced to hire someone they know will be an unnecessary burden on the company?


Then you can effectively discriminate against almost anyone for any reason if you allow this policy to continue to its logical conclusion.
 
tommy1808
Posts: 13254
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: U-Haul Won't Hire Smokers (In Some States)

Fri Jan 03, 2020 12:02 pm

Redd wrote:
tommy1808 wrote:

Nope, it shouldn´t be. Only what effects work performance demonstrable shall count. Smoking doesn´t, as disgusting as it is.

best regards
Thomas


There's lots of literature on this topic. Smokers are quite a bit less productive than non-smokers.


Yes, there is and they are. On average. But when you hire, you are talking to a specific person. That person may be fit an healthy, regardless of smoking, may consume nowhere near the number of cigarettes smokers in those studies do (~1 pack/day-ish), may be a former smoker, where much of the same issues apply.

If it is legal to do, employers should not be allowed to make hiring decisions based on it, if the risk is too high, governments can ban it, if the risk seems to be too hire for a specific employer, the employer can incentivise quitting. At my company the number of smokers has halved within a few month by simply putting the total smoking break time on their time sheet as a separate position. Smoking apparently isn´t that addictive once you realize that is 3 extra hours/week in the office.

best regards
Thomas
Well, there is prophecy in the bible after all: 2 Timothy 3:1-6
 
tommy1808
Posts: 13254
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: U-Haul Won't Hire Smokers (In Some States)

Fri Jan 03, 2020 12:07 pm

Kiwirob wrote:
alfa164 wrote:
tommy1808 wrote:
If a company feels an employee doesn´t perform the remedy is firing them. Its not telling every employee how they have to live their life.


Are you totally missing the point here? They aren't firing anyone, and they aren't telling any employee how to live their life.

They are choosing not to hire people with a desultory habit - as should be their right.


They are discriminating when they hire, it's no different than an employer not hiring you because you're coloured or are christian or have blue eyes or are female.


being Christian or blue eyed have no effect on your productivity though. Black in northern countries would be interesting to see if there is any measurable health effect (Vitamin D insufficiency may happen more often). Being female however clearly has on average health and workplace safety implication, just as many other things that are banned from consideration.

I had a interview a couple of weeks ago, one of the questions asked was if I was intending to have any more children and if I was going on dad leave, this was asked by the German CEO, the Norwegian HR manager wasn't happy with the question and told me not to answer, that type of question is illegal in Norway. I answered anyway, and got the job.


Just as illegal to ask in Germany as in Norway.

best regards
Thomas
Well, there is prophecy in the bible after all: 2 Timothy 3:1-6
 
User avatar
WildcatYXU
Posts: 3183
Joined: Sat May 06, 2006 2:05 pm

Re: U-Haul Won't Hire Smokers (In Some States)

Fri Jan 03, 2020 12:17 pm

To all of those who believe that U-Haul did this to protect the health of their employees I have a bridge for sale. Do you also believe in Santa bringing presents down your chimney?
Whatever they may say, it is the time smokers spend away from their work stations U-Haul is after. Nothing else. Not that the time lost smoking isn't a legitimate concern. I remember from my old workplace always seeing the same faces at the smoking stations when I needed to go from my lab to other places at the plant. I believe they weren't there only when I needed to do some repairs in a cellar, packaging or racking.
Also, some posters really need to spend time at some hardcore totalitarian country. Not as tourists, but as regular people. Maybe it would cure them from forcing their opinions and desires on other people.
And last, but not least, I'm making a mental note not to rent from U-Haul in the future. Not that I would with their pricing structure anyway.
Last edited by WildcatYXU on Fri Jan 03, 2020 12:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
310, 319, 320, 321, 321N, 332, 333, 343, 345, 346, 732, 735, 73G, 738, 744, 752, 762, 763, 77L, 77W, 788, AT4, AT7, BEH, C402, CR2, CRA, CR9, DH1, DH3, DH4, E45, E75, E90, E95, F28, F50, F100, MD82, Saab 340, YAK40
 
VSMUT
Posts: 4469
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2016 11:40 am

Re: U-Haul Won't Hire Smokers (In Some States)

Fri Jan 03, 2020 12:26 pm

tommy1808 wrote:
Its flat out ridiculous...


No, it is sensible, and we need to do more to punish smokers in Europe too.


tommy1808 wrote:
Because nothing says "land of the free" more than your employer regulating every aspect of your life. Your employer decides what you do 40 hours a week, beyond that he on only gets a say in fringe activities and nothing else. Smoking may be the least healthy free time activity of them all, but its far from the only risk to your health you have.


Smoking harms the rest of us, that is the big difference.


tommy1808 wrote:
I work to live a life and enjoying it, i am not alive to work.


Smokers are a pestilence to non-smokers. You enjoy your life at the expense of ours.


[quote="tommy1808"]Whats Next, banning 90% of the Planet for traveling because it is more risky there than at home? Heck, i wouldn´t be allowed to have a US vacation ever again....../quote]

Travelling to 90% of the planet doesn't harm your coworkers.
 
NIKV69
Posts: 13482
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 4:27 am

Re: U-Haul Won't Hire Smokers (In Some States)

Sat Jan 04, 2020 3:13 am

DDR wrote:
Alaska Airlines does not hire smokers as well.


Wow I am very behind the curve on this. In fact my brother just put out an ad for roadies to move his bands equipment when they do weddings and he said no smokers, he got a call from an irate smoker needing a job and he asked him why you say no smokers? My brother said you take too many smoke breaks and stink and hung up.

I love it!

Such a 180 from the 60s when if you didn't smoke you were square.
I am the Googlizer!!!
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 12347
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: U-Haul Won't Hire Smokers (In Some States)

Sat Jan 04, 2020 4:24 am

NIKV69 wrote:
DDR wrote:
Alaska Airlines does not hire smokers as well.


Wow I am very behind the curve on this. In fact my brother just put out an ad for roadies to move his bands equipment when they do weddings and he said no smokers, he got a call from an irate smoker needing a job and he asked him why you say no smokers? My brother said you take too many smoke breaks and stink and hung up.

I love it!

Such a 180 from the 60s when if you didn't smoke you were square.


You got me back for yesterday's coffee spit. That cracked me up - these idiots think making an irate call is going to get them a job? FFS...
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
Dieuwer
Posts: 2487
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2017 6:27 pm

Re: U-Haul Won't Hire Smokers (In Some States)

Sat Jan 04, 2020 5:12 am

tommy1808 wrote:
ArchGuy1 wrote:
tommy1808 wrote:

:checkmark: :checkmark: :checkmark: :checkmark: :checkmark: :checkmark: :checkmark: :checkmark:

Its flat out ridiculous...



Because nothing says "land of the free" more than your employer regulating every aspect of your life. Your employer decides what you do 40 hours a week, beyond that he on only gets a say in fringe activities and nothing else. Smoking may be the least healthy free time activity of them all, but its far from the only risk to your health you have.

I work to live a life and enjoying it, i am not alive to work.

Whats Next, banning 90% of the Planet for traveling because it is more risky there than at home? Heck, i wouldn´t be allowed to have a US vacation ever again......

Gosh, i am glad to live in a place where my boss essentially can´t tell me anything about my free time, and only very limited even at work (can´t impose a dresscode or hairstyle for example).

best regards
Thomas

What country do you live in.


Germany


Germany has banned smoking in pubic places. :alert:
It also pertains to some businesses such as restaurants. Not sure how it pertains to say private office workers.
 
User avatar
DarkSnowyNight
Posts: 2667
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 7:59 pm

Re: U-Haul Won't Hire Smokers (In Some States)

Sat Jan 04, 2020 7:24 am

WildcatYXU wrote:
Whatever they may say, it is the time smokers spend away from their work stations U-Haul is after. Nothing else. Not that the time lost smoking isn't a legitimate concern.


Most of your other points are right on.

But this one is more than a little overstated, and likely, not that true.

If a company is looking in this direction to swipe more time from their employees, the issue is that they are understaffed, not the personell themselves.

Having worked a number of job types, I really have not noticed smokers taking a particular toll this way.

Where I am at now, in fact, it is really down to the employee. In my particular case, I do not smoke at work, since I cannot drink there anyway.

But once I have met what I feel my milestones for the morning are, I have no problem just knocking right off. Sometimes I will write an article, or a set, or even just go for a walk or run. Last week I took three hours out of an afternoon to go have sex with an old friend across town.
What I will not do is smoke. Nor will I sell excess productivity for the same rate.

By contrast, I see a lot of employees who do smoke, and put a bit more time in than I do. Sometimes they are more junior and have no choice. Sometimes they just want to. And yes, I am sure that a few are a little lazier. I know a few non-smokers who like to hide out in the shitter at every opportunity.*

But what I observed consistently is that being a smoker or not has nothing to do with it. FWIW...


*I do not know why they do this. My approach of telling my boss I will be back when I need to seems to work a lot better.
"Nous ne sommes pas infectés. Il n'y a pas d'infection ici..."
 
User avatar
fr8mech
Posts: 8061
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 9:00 am

Re: U-Haul Won't Hire Smokers (In Some States)

Sat Jan 04, 2020 7:42 am

DarkSnowyNight wrote:
If a company is looking in this direction to swipe more time from their employees, the issue is that they are understaffed, not the personell themselves.



Interesting phrasing there. So, you think the employer is trying to steal time from the employee? Strange, because when the employee is on the clock, the time already belongs to the employer, barring any contractual or legal obligations to a meal or break period.
When seconds count, the police are minutes away, or may not come at all.
It’s hard to win an argument with a smart person, but it’s damn near impossible to win an argument with a stupid person. ~B. Murray
Ego Bibere Capulus, Ut Aliis Sit Vivere
 
NIKV69
Posts: 13482
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 4:27 am

Re: U-Haul Won't Hire Smokers (In Some States)

Sat Jan 04, 2020 7:48 am

Aaron747 wrote:
NIKV69 wrote:
DDR wrote:
Alaska Airlines does not hire smokers as well.


Wow I am very behind the curve on this. In fact my brother just put out an ad for roadies to move his bands equipment when they do weddings and he said no smokers, he got a call from an irate smoker needing a job and he asked him why you say no smokers? My brother said you take too many smoke breaks and stink and hung up.

I love it!

Such a 180 from the 60s when if you didn't smoke you were square.


You got me back for yesterday's coffee spit. That cracked me up - these idiots think making an irate call is going to get them a job? FFS...


You would be surprised. I kind of feel bad, I have caddies that work for me and hide it until they are not working it's a shame. I was shocked when I heard about Alaska but my brother is the most anal person ever but hey he built his business from nothing and wants his clients to be happy and stay clients so it's his choice. It is amazing how times have changed. I don't smoke so it's all foreign to me but I can understand frustration of job seekers.
I am the Googlizer!!!
 
User avatar
DarkSnowyNight
Posts: 2667
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 7:59 pm

Re: U-Haul Won't Hire Smokers (In Some States)

Sat Jan 04, 2020 8:11 am

fr8mech wrote:
DarkSnowyNight wrote:
If a company is looking in this direction to swipe more time from their employees, the issue is that they are understaffed, not the personell themselves.



Interesting phrasing there. So, you think the employer is trying to steal time from the employee?


Not time, but production. Value, if you also like.

I agreed to do a job, for a rate, within a given time frame. If I exceed that parameter and finish early, the job is still completed and they have what they want.

If they would like another or more things, I will, under certain circumstances, sell that to them. But not for the same price.

They will already be able to bill for another project on the first's time this way. There is no reason for them to be paid twice and me only once.




Fr8mech wrote:
Strange, because when the employee is on the clock, the time already belongs to the employer, barring any contractual or legal obligations to a meal or break period.


Hmmm...

I think an apt metaphor would be as follows.

Suppose you go to a restaurant and order a steak. You have 45 minutes allotted to be there.
Now, suppose you decide to eat two steaks in the same 45 minutes.
You are welcome to stay the entire 45 minutes. But it is not probable, or customary, for the restaurant to charge for only one steak...
"Nous ne sommes pas infectés. Il n'y a pas d'infection ici..."
 
User avatar
fr8mech
Posts: 8061
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 9:00 am

Re: U-Haul Won't Hire Smokers (In Some States)

Sat Jan 04, 2020 8:30 am

DarkSnowyNight wrote:
Not time, but production. Value, if you also like.

I agreed to do a job, for a rate, within a given time frame. If I exceed that parameter and finish early, the job is still completed and they have what they want.

If they would like another or more things, I will, under certain circumstances, sell that to them. But not for the same price.

They will already be able to bill for another project on the first's time this way. There is no reason for them to be paid twice and me only once.



Well, point 1 is that you wrote:

DarkSnowyNight wrote:
swipe more time from their employees


not more value, not more production, but more time.

Next point, is that it depends on the work you're hired to do and how your contract, if one exists, is written.

My folks work 10 hours. They have no production goals. The analyze chronic aircraft faults and write plans to address those faults. They may get 5 or 6 plans in a shift, or may be able to put together part of a plan. All depends on the fault encountered. So, all their time "on the clock" is my time, except a 30 minute lunch and 2 10 minute breaks.

DarkSnowyNight wrote:
Suppose you go to a restaurant and order a steak. You have 45 minutes allotted to be there.
Now, suppose you decide to eat two steaks in the same 45 minutes.
You are welcome to stay the entire 45 minutes. But it is not probable, or customary, for the restaurant to charge for only one steak...


Nonsensical. The time between punch-in and punch-out belongs to the employer.
When seconds count, the police are minutes away, or may not come at all.
It’s hard to win an argument with a smart person, but it’s damn near impossible to win an argument with a stupid person. ~B. Murray
Ego Bibere Capulus, Ut Aliis Sit Vivere
 
User avatar
DarkSnowyNight
Posts: 2667
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 7:59 pm

Re: U-Haul Won't Hire Smokers (In Some States)

Sat Jan 04, 2020 9:22 am

fr8mech wrote:



Well, point 1 is that you wrote:

DarkSnowyNight wrote:
swipe more time from their employees


not more value, not more production, but more time.


Indeed. And I did so purposefully. See below. . .



Fr8mech wrote:
Next point, is that it depends on the work you're hired to do and how your contract, if one exists, is written.


This is true, yes.


Fr8mech wrote:
My folks work 10 hours. They have no production goals. The analyze chronic aircraft faults and write plans to address those faults. They may get 5 or 6 plans in a shift, or may be able to put together part of a plan. All depends on the fault encountered. So, all their time "on the clock" is my time, except a 30 minute lunch and 2 10 minute breaks.


And if enough of them choose not to see it that way, without regard to passive or aggressive in nature, you then have a problem.
This probably will not be a problem for you, as it is unlikely your reports own patents you work within. This is not the case for my employer.

In my case, I am enough for my employer to have a problem, should there be a misunderstanding about whose time mine is.


Fr8mech wrote:
DarkSnowyNight wrote:
Suppose you go to a restaurant and order a steak. You have 45 minutes allotted to be there.
Now, suppose you decide to eat two steaks in the same 45 minutes.
You are welcome to stay the entire 45 minutes. But it is not probable, or customary, for the restaurant to charge for only one steak...


Nonsensical. The time between punch-in and punch-out belongs to the employer.


No. Your time always belongs to you and no one else. If you choose to work within a different framework, that is fine, but it is still your choice to do so.
If you are being paid less for the same or more production day vs day, this is something that should be addressed.

I would, in any case.

Where time and production intermix is the -in my case- fact that if I am finished my things for the day, there are other productive things I can be doing. Or non productive things I would rather be doing.
Because of that, it is very important to maintain the stance that my time is mine.


FWIW, I know we're off topic some, but I do not mind answering your replies.
"Nous ne sommes pas infectés. Il n'y a pas d'infection ici..."

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Alias1024, apodino, b4thefall, Dutchy, luckyone, SRQLOT and 40 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos