I agree it can be like the government. But it is not in fact the government, and they should be able to hire or not hire anyone they want.

Nut,

The problem is that there is are vast differences between a small business and a major corporation. First, public education is a function of government. Ergo, hiring practices by public education is also hiring practices of government. That public education is part and parcel of government is manifestly evident by the fact that public school districts publicly elect boards of trustees via the same election process that all elected governmental office holders are, and the fact that ISDs levy taxes. Private enterprise does not, indeed cannot levy taxes. Ergo, public education is a governmental function. Even in the private sector large corporations act in many ways more like governmental entities than mid-sized or small business does. This is a matter of their having much greater institutional mass, and bureaucratic inertia. For this reason small and mid-sized business need to be treated as different sorts of institutions than large corporations.


TFP

Companies can only be selective if the market allows them to be so. If the supply of potential employees outstrips the demand then companies can be more selective, but if the demand outstrips the supply of potential employees then companies can not be nearly so demanding when it comes to potential employees. What is now allowing Baylor, and other such employers to reject potential employees based on their use of tobacco is that such a large portion of the current adult population are non-smokers. Tn particular those folks in healthcare professions, and others that work in healthcare have an ever larger segment of that population that are non-smokers than does the general public. Thus, excluding smokers from consideration for employment Baylor only marginally diminishes the pool of potential employees. This could not have happened back in the ‘50s more than 40% of the adult population at that time were smokers. Currently, only about 20% of adults in the general population smoke. I suspect that at most only about 12% or so of those that are in health-care occupations smoke. When the population from which employees are drawn have only 1 in 8 smokers rather than more than 2 of 5 then employers can afford to be much more selective.

TFP

Study

The above link is to a study undertaken by the NIH. The study is about the effect on the nursing staff at hospitals from nurses that smoke via the smoking nurses taking more, and/or longer work-breaks than do non-smoking nurses. Basically nurses that smoke are very much more likely NOT to miss work-breaks than are non-smoking nurses. The upshot is that nurses that smoke use their breaks to go smoke in-order to satiate their nicotine cravings. Non-smoking nurses not having such cravings are more prone to miss their work-breaks. The upshot is that non-smoking nurses end up covering for their counterparts that smoke, thus denying the non-smoking nurses the opportunity to take a break and ‘recharge their batteries.’

In effect the smoking nurses place a greater uninterrupted workload on their non-smoking counterparts because of their ‘smoking-breaks.’

I can personally attest to problems with nursing, and care staff at the nursing home that my parents were in some years ago. Both my folks were in a nursing home, my Dad due to his COPD, and my Mom because of her Alzhimer’s. Dad kept very much his lucidity till about a month before his death. This over three and a half years. Mom’s lucidity diminished in an uneven way over the nearly five years that she was there. About 14 months before Dad passed away, Mom was experiencing some discomfort in the early morning hours. Dad pressed his nurse call button, and speed-dialed the nurses desk to get Mom some help. After doing both these things several times, he called me at the house. I must have been in the deepest portion of my sleep cycle because I never heard it. Dad then tried to call two of Mom’s sisters. At the time they and their husbands were all out of town. Finally, after again calling the nursing desk and getting no answer Dad called 911. The 911 dispatcher tried to call the nursing desk repeatedly, and then dispatched ETs via the Tyler Fire Department. The fire department rolled a truck with full lights and sirens. Upon their arrival the ETs found the staff out on the back patio taking a smoking break. The fire chief was notified and he contacted the director of nursing, and the facilities administrator while the ETs were still at the nursing home. I was phoned at six am by the administrator and got to the nursing home at seven that morning. I went directly to my folks room. I found Dad looking pretty pleased with himself, and he told me what happened. When I went to see the administrator she explain what had happened. The staff that was on duty at the time was fired for cause by the time I had been phoned that morning, and she and the director of nursing were already interviewing for new staff. Finally, state nursing home inspectors, etc. were just arriving to conduct an investigation.

The upshot of all this is that four heads rolled for all being inaccessible at same time. One was an LVN, and the others were CNAs. I know that the four were having their licenses reviewed, but I don’t know if anything after that. I can also attest that after that if my Dad hit the call-button someone was in my folks room with but little delay for the next six months. I also can say that several families of residents of the wing that my folks resided in at the nursing home subsequently spoke with me letting me know that they felt much better about the care that their folks were being given because my Dad still had his mental faculties, and could thus take some sort of action, even if it was just making a phone call.

FWIW,
Larry

Fixed that for you. Size of companies does matter when it comes to ‘open’ employment as well as many other things. Just because it is not government per se, does not mean that statute, and policy should be the same for large corporations as it is for small business. The reason for this is that organizations that wield large amounts of power must be held accountable by society at large for their actions, policies, etc. simply because they DO wield large amounts of power. What in part makes the American system the AMERICAN system is checks and balances on power.

Being a Populatirian, I don’t trust BIG government, BIG business, BIG labor, BIG religion, and I certainly don’t trust BIG media. I simply do NOT trust large concentrations of power in the hands of the few. I further do not trust bureaucracy, and bureaucrats of any sort anymore than I trust politicians, and I don’t trust ANY politician any further than I can throw the Battleship Texas. Freedom, and Liberty along with the security of society as a whole has to be based on a social system that disperses, and distributes power throughout society rather than concentrating power in just one, or just a few nodes, and/or nexuses. When power is disseminated broadly within a society then there is little opportunity for power centers to become established that have the potential to usurp the rights, and liberties of the individual as there will be more than plenty of others that possess the power to counter any potential usurpations of liberty, and personal rights.

TFP

I don't think government regulation is the proper tool for that check on power. If the people care that much, popular opinion will do something about it. People will stop working there, shopping there, supporting them. If they don't care enough not to, it must not be that big of a deal.

Hey Fishing Physicist, do you have any numbers on the proportion of healthcare professionals that smoke compared to the general population. I don't, but based on personal observation, I think it is at least as high if not higher. I was surprised when I saw a respiratory therapist smoking but my neighbor (who used to be a RT and a smoker) told me that most of them are.


RE: Urin testing, I don't care if the company is private or public or the government. I think it is too intrusive but that is what we open the door up to when we expect employers to meet our private an personal needs.

I prefer to test my tobacco for urine.

What about the BIG Bang Theory?

Its been years since I relieved myself on your tobacco. Why waste all that money testing it?

Biggie Smalls?

This!!!!

And I hope anyone thinks that doing ANYTHING will bring our premiums down. Nothing will. It's all a scam to ge the idiot public to think that but has ANYONE's ins gone down, ever?

We have "Right to Work" laws to protect workers from union coercion. I don't see why this is any different.

I think they should be able to hire whoever they want, If they only want to hire "little people" I could care less. A place in OKC called Chilinos seemed to only hire Mexicans to work at thier restraunts fine by me.

If they want to narrow the field of choice that is thier problem, might miss the best emploee ever that way.

I got to say though the smokers Iv worked with were always on a "smoke break" ( ALL of them at the last place came in, in the morning clocked in already stinking up the place and went on break) and they tend to stink even first thing in the morning!

Well if you don't like the policies of a company don't go to work there. Take your $$$ and start your own company. This is the USA and you are free to work wherever you want.

I get tested for cig's
but get a pretty good discount on my health insurance

How about it's my businesses and I'll hire who I want. If i don't want to pay the extra for insurance premiums for smokers then so be it. If you want to smoke then you can go work elsewhere. I have the same right to say that you want to work for me then you had to have gone to Harvard Business school. As long as you are not hired due to your race, religion, and those other deals the gov't says you can't base employment on then so be it. I think it's bs that I can't not hire someone because they are from some country that hates America.

I guess this means that tobacco is about to become an illegal substance ...

What if the company is a major corporation where the ownership is a very large number of shareholders, and the stock is offered publicly? This is BIG business. There is no sole proprietor, and the CEO, CFO, etc. along with the board of directors do not constitute a majority of shareholder, and in many, many case no where near a majority of shareholders. In many cases those making company/corporate policy are NOT the owners. They have been hired to be CEO, CFO, etc. and were in now way involved in the building of the company.

What then?
TFP

The executive management of any large corporation routinely make strategic and tactical decisions which directly effect the operation of the corporation.

They ARE the custodians of the corporation.

I say smokers should unite, form a union and demand cigarrettes and smoke breaks. You should have quite a voice, being about 10% of the workforce today. That'll learn em.