I'm not gonna lie, i smoke, and have for 10 years (almost). well, my company is now testing for nicotine and if you fail (regardless the source) they are charging a surcharge. however, there IS a catch. they are ONLY requiring those who have medical coverage under this company. they are also requiring a biometric screening for covered employees, those who (also) do not submit are being charged a surcharge.
now here is my problem........they are not requiring ALL employees to submit to this testing like they would a drug test. only those who have HEALTH.
would that not be considered discrimination?
and for employees who don't have coverage else where are REQUIRED to take the company's health insurance. is that even legal? that's the ONLY reason i'm still on it, cause i have no other options and they require us to have it-trust me, i'm looking for an affordable private insurance.
and my next question, how can they hold nicotine against people when it's still legal? and it doesn't matter the source of nicotine. ecigs, patches, etc are all "failed test". i get if they want a "smoke free work place" ok so then ban smoking from company property.
now before anyone goes on to say and bash for me to just quit, i'm working on that part, that's not the point. a nicotine addiction is worse than crack......clinically proven
I'm honestly looking into those options as we speak. My job doesn't require international so that argument is moot
In a "right to work" state, they can fire you for any reason or no reason. As a hiring manager, if you refused to do what I needed as part of your job, I would fire you and never tell you why. By law I don't have to.
If international travel is part of your job description, any idiot would know that includes any required visa and immunizations to be allowed entrance to the foreign country. You sign on your application that there would be immunizations and health screens required (plus random drug testing and a requirement for a TS/SBI).
There is no "constitutional right" that requires all job descriptions to be to your liking. You never would be forced to get a vaccination against your will. You could refuse it, and you would just have to find a more suitable employment opportunity.
When I got hired my medical choices were MY choices and charges don't necessarily mean criminal. It could mean trying to force ppl against their constitutional rights
You wouldn't have a leg to stand on. They can require that and you have two options; get the shot or quit. They have done it in the past with no repercussions.
I think when you are well compensated you don't care about minor things like that so much. The lowest paid employees, a few fresh-outs, make $85 an hour.
BTW: "Pressing charges" assumes a criminal offense as defined by the penal code. There is no crime in saying it's a requirement of your job to get a vaccine. Almost all of us are required to travel internationally which also requires vaccines. If you had a problem with it you'd be required to state that when you were hired.
I wont comply. Ill claim its against my religion. Then if I'm penalized....I'll press charges
Oh, I can't wait for this to start happening to the people who think it is okay because it deals with cigarettes. Soon enough it will be weight issues, drivers, drinkers, people who don't exercise enough, single people, men, etc... Everyone of the previously mentioned are at higher risk for health problems. So when they come for you next, just remember that you are pretty much at fault for it so no whining.
Because employees who smoke drive up the cost of their insurance premiums for them and employees who don't smoke. Personally, I think its great because it doesn't punish those who have made good health choices.
The words of an insurance agent I worked with... don't smoke for 3 days before the test and the nicotine will be gone from your system. Of course, by the end of it you may as well just continue not smoking.