Employer’s right to not hire smokers
Weyco may be one of the only large companies in the country
that can boast not only a smoke-free workplace, but a smoke-free workforce.
Achieving that status, however, didn’t come without a lot of effort—and
controversy. Howard Weyers, the founder and CEO of the Michigan-based
health-benefits-management company, attracted a lot of media attention—and the
ire of workers’ advocates—when he let go four employees recently after they
refused to stop smoking. Civil-rights activists accused the company of
discrimination, arguing that Weyers was punishing workers for engaging in a
legal activity on their own time. Weyers claimed that he gave his employees
plenty of notice and opportunities and incentives to quit. “I gave them a
little over 15 months to decide which is most important: my job or
tobacco?” says Weyers. That’s a question that more Americans may be asking
themselves these days. Most companies already ban tobacco use in the workplace
and more than a half dozen states and hundreds of cities have enacted laws to
the same effect. Now, citing rising health-insurance costs and concerns about
employees’ well-being, a growing number of companies are refusing to hire
people who smoke, even if they do so on their own time and nowhere near their
jobs. An estimated 6,000 employers no longer hire smokers, according to the
National Workrights Institute, an affiliate of the American Civil Liberties
Union.
Discuss with your peers how you would react in this type of
situation. Should an employer have the right to not hire you solely based on
the fact that you are a smoker? Why or why not? After creating your initial
post, respond to at least two of your peers and discuss whether you agree or
disagree with their viewpoint. Explain and justify your response.
Be sure to support your analysis with appropriate material
from the text and outside web sites.
