Oh, well, ok. I admit, I did smoke a pack of Menthol Mores one night when I was 28. That was it.
I don't like the smell of cigarettes.
Certainly smoking has been proven to be unhealthy for you.
However, the latest tendency of businesses in the USA to have a "tobacco-free hiring policy" may cause a lot of ruffled feathers. Or will it?
Not only do they have this as a work policy, but also some will require their workers to actually submit to urine tests to detect nicotine. Basically, cigarettes are being treated as a narcotic. Some courts have upheld the employer's rights not to hire based on whether or not you inhale.
What I don't understand is the discrepancy in all of this.
The tobacco industry is allowed to flourish - but it is the people who have been sucked into the use of tobacco by the widespread cigarette advertising and legality that are the ones that are being penalized. Yes, there have been penalties and restrictions imposed on the tobacco industry in recent years, but they are the ones with deep pockets - not your average J.Q. Public.
The problem I have with this - once they have banned smoking altogether - what is next? Banning fat people? That would eliminate half of America. Marginalize anyone using alcohol in their private lives? (I'm talking about a glass of wine in the evening, folks - not blatant alcoholism!) Perhaps they will attempt to revitalize the Prohibition? How well did that work??
Hey, I am the last one to like anyone puffing away in my little sphere. I may even tell you to go elsewhere and smoke. And - I certainly don't condone smoking around children or babies.
But I would be the first one to say that personal choices are personal choices in the matter of cigarettes.in one's personal space.
No, they aren't a healthy lifestyle choice. Yes, they are linked to cancer and other diagnoses such as Emphysema - which cause the health system a lot of money, never mind it's a horrible way to die.
But where does it stop - our employers telling us what our restrictions are in regards to personal liberty?
Is it ok for employers to demand this? Some will dare say that workers should have NO RIGHTS in the workplace. (see the comments section).
So, if that is the case, when will your employer be telling *you* what you can or can't do in your own house on your own time?
11 comments:
The reason this is an issue in the States is not something we would even think of in Canada
Employers, especially Hospitals, in the US under-wright the private Medical Insurance they provide employees as a benefit of employment.
Smoker = greater medical expense/employee paid out vs the cost for a non-smoker.
If you don't believe it ask your friendly neighbourhood actuary ;)
This topic so pisses me off, let me say that first.
I am on the roller coast of being on again with my battle to stay off cigarettes. I have battled the ugly demon nicotine for so many years and at first as kid bought into how cool it was to smoke. Remember how cool the Marlboro Man was? I am much happier as a non-smoker and yes, healthier too.
But, this topic of how corporations try to ILLEGALLY control their employees and invade their privacy just burns my cookies.
Who has the right to say what we can or, can not do in our homes? Who says it's okay to take away a freedom we are entitled to do in our home? Are we not adult enough to understand the complications of the acts we do?
And, yes, what about alcohol consumption? Will that be next? Susie take this little bottle and drop me some urine? Because what of the health risks associated with alcohol? What about fatty foods? What about driving to work with bad tires? When's it going to stop? When is enough, enough?
If you allow something like this to occur you are telling these corporations it's okay to check up and to invade someone's home and space. One thing leads to another and they WILL erode away at other worker rights. Will you step up to the plate and say, ENOUGH already?
What I find very interesting is that Americans will allow this type of personal rights invasion without a fight... yet the "invasion" of universal health...not so much.
night tech: we like to try to be healthy, but there is not the monitoring to the extent that you see in the US here in Canada. It may cost you more for private insurance for your house or private life insurance, but your health insurance as a smoker is the same as a non smoker. The extra health benefits I get here in Canada don't hinge on whether one smokes or not either. And certainly one doesn't have to submit to a nicotine test.
Phiddy: yes, what gets me is the "rights" issue. Also how the government allows the tobacco industry to thrive and then allows business to penalize those like yourselves that the tobacco industry hooked in...
As some of the articles say, it is usually the ancilliary services that it affects the most - those who can't afford losing their job.
Cartoon characters....I'm Canadian!
Have worked in the States. You wouldn't belive the breaches of what we take for granted as personal rights and freedoms allowed the allmighty corporations south of the 49th.
NT: ;) I know u are canadian....me also...just letting the american readers in on the info and the difference :)
I also worked south of the border - 5 years +....I have several posts about working down there in past blogs. On the whole it was a good experience, but to grow old there just wasn't going to be an option once I needed iincreased health care more..... :) as much as we Canadians complain about our own system (because that's just what we do!) most of us wouldn't trade it for what they have south of the 49th...it isn't perfect but we are working on it!
On the smoking issue- I'm an allergic to smoke non-smoker, but I too have sympathy for those smokers caught in this mess. So many desperately want to quit but cannot.
On U.S. healthcare- I'm baffled by people's resistance to this; truly I am. There is no perfect solution because everyone is marching to sickness and death at some point, and science will never have the magic wand to make it go away. But everyone should be able to see a doctor on an equal playing field. By the way, I have one of the best insurance plans available as my husband works for a huge corporation.
I love hearing your viewpoints from north of our border!
Honey: Thanks for your visit! :)
Good point re: the smokers that are caught in the mess...
Re: US Healthcare and the resistance of many towards health care for all... it is my firm belief that basic health care is a right. Yes, it is costly but it's more costly not to provide for those who find healthcare impossibly expensive. My husband is totally amazed at the care he has here. Like I have said many times, I don't mind paying my taxes so that no one loses their house in times of catastrophic illness. I have relatives south of the 49th that strongly are against universal healthcare, yet they are only one small illness away from losing their house if they are the ones to pull the short straw in life. No way to know who illness is going to strike next.
It's great to have a good insurance plan...but what happens when one loses their job or becomes ill and ends up taking time off work due to illness, then gets laid off because of that and then no longer has coverage? It happens... and it's so sad. Unless someone is unbelievably wealthy....there is no real protection.
Thanks for your comment! :)
I don't usually go back and forth with comments, I hope you don't mind. But you are so right! It is a fact that most bankruptcies are filed by people who had insurance and faced a major illness.
I've had one conversation with someone about healthcare here. I made a comment about my surprise that so many were against it, as I thought she would feel the same. Both her and her husband were directly affected by the lack of healthcare and downturn in the economy with their jobs. (She's a RN, BSN and her husband is a manager at a nat'l nursing agency) But she went off on me that the gov't needs to stay out of their business. She explained their "health insurance" to me, and it's basically a ponzy scheme. They put money into their church and their church makes the payments on doctor's visits. She said, we're healthy so that's all we need.
I know what you're thinking because I was probably thinking the same. And she's educated!
I explained that I had health insurance because I think it's mostly those who do who don't want it. But I think it's mostly fear of the unknown.
Honey: I don't mind! :)
I agree with you, it seems to me that the "christian" thing to do is to care for those who are down and out and who can't afford the medical care - "Blessed are the poor" - often it is the "working poor" that suffer. That is why I don't understand the "religious" that don't support healthcare as a basic right.
As for the RN who "pays to the church" for their healthcare - it seems to me that someone IS "getting into their healthcare" and from my experience, those involved in church heirarchy are not immune to dishonesty and ripping off the public. I've seen it happen so many times. They tend not to be as transparent with their methods because of people's blind trust. They are sitting ducks for those who would take advantage.
Here is a good information pdf :
http://medicare.ca/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/sustainability-factsheet-english-june-161.pdf
Anyway, Thanks for your comments! :) It's a subject close to my heart.
Sometimes I almost feel dumb when I'm so ignorant about certain things. I had no idea about any of this and have really enjoyed reading this---as well as through all of the comments.
Your blog is one of my absolute favorites. I love reading about your family history, your take on current events, funny lil snip its---and just the fact that you share a bit of your world.
awww..thank u so much! I try to mix it up...I can't really talk about work due to confidentiality, so all my medical stories are from years past - but I will have to write more of the family history.;)
I like your blog and also your cousin? that has moved to CA...
Post a Comment