East News

Viewing comments for:

Mass. Employee Sues Firm for Firing Him Because He Smoked

East News • December 4, 2006
A 30-year-old Massachusetts man who has smoked for more than a decade filed a lawsuit last week against The Scotts Co., alleging the lawn and garden company violated his privacy and civil rights ...

Insurance Journal is not responsible for the content of the message below.

Subject: RE: fired smoker #2

Posted On: December 4, 2006, 2:28 pm CST
Posted By: KLS
Comment:
As an employer you are free to act as you wish, Bob, as long as it is within the scope of laws in your state.

Your ethics are a matter of your personal choice, too. I don't think anyone is trying to argue that it isn't your choice.

If you don't want to hire smokers, then by all means, don't.

The problem with this particular situation is... it apparently was not made clear to the smoker that his employment was conditional upon a urine test for nicotine. In most cases, employers are required to make the conditions of employment known upon or before hiring. Depends on if it's an employment-at-will state.

Let's say you're a member of Oprah's book club and you read on your own personal time. The company for which you work decides that the book choices are junk. Your car is searched the next week and one of your Oprah books is discovered. You're then fired. The firing was questionably legal, and it was unethical.

Now to put the shoe on the other foot. If the company told you *before* you were hired that Oprah books were prohibited and employment was conditional upon compliance with such policy. Then you chose to violate the policy, got caught and subsequently fired. That would at least be ethical.

Personally, I want to be able to choose whether I work for a company that crawls all up in my private business and I want to know whether they intend to do so BEFORE I accept the job.
Subject Posted By Posted On
RE: Protected Class? Retro Man
Dec 11, 2006, 12:10 pm
Fired Smoker smoking employee
Dec 11, 2006, 11:48 am
Protected Class? Cut the Crap
Dec 11, 2006, 11:20 am
RE: RE: Privacy At Work Retro Man
Dec 11, 2006, 10:51 am
RE: Privacy At Work john
Dec 11, 2006, 10:15 am
RE: Scotts Flamable Chemicals - DUH!!! NO SMOKING AT WORK
Dec 5, 2006, 12:49 pm
Privacy At Work Compman
Dec 5, 2006, 11:14 am
Scotts Flamable Chemicals - DUH!!! Age Old
Dec 5, 2006, 10:51 am
RE: RE: How deep do you want your employer to dig? BJH
Dec 5, 2006, 8:02 am
Re: Fired Smoker Smoker with a Choice
Dec 5, 2006, 7:27 am
RE: RE: fired smoker Jim
Dec 4, 2006, 4:52 pm
RE: fired smoker KS
Dec 4, 2006, 3:31 pm
RE: fired smoker Sean
Dec 4, 2006, 3:11 pm
RE: fired smoker #2 KLS
Dec 4, 2006, 2:28 pm
fired smoker #2 bob
Dec 4, 2006, 2:03 pm
RE: RE: How deep do you want your employer to dig? KLS
Dec 4, 2006, 1:46 pm
RE: RE: How deep do you want your employer to dig? Compman
Dec 4, 2006, 1:37 pm
RE: How deep do you want your employer to dig? jay
Dec 4, 2006, 1:30 pm
RE: How deep do you want your employer to dig? WhoDat
Dec 4, 2006, 1:23 pm
How deep do you want your employer to dig? KLS
Dec 4, 2006, 1:18 pm
RE: RE: fired smoker WhoDat
Dec 4, 2006, 1:10 pm
RE: fired smoker Compman
Dec 4, 2006, 12:58 pm
fired smoker bob
Dec 4, 2006, 12:49 pm
Back to article

Post a Comment

.