Re: Work in Michigan, Get Fired, Or fined?....


"N8NOE" <N8NOE@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1134470021.690069.206870@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Weyco Announces Plan to Charge Employees if their Spouses
> Smoke
> December 9, 2005
> By Michael Siegel
>
> In a CNN interview broadcast online yesterday, the president of Okemos,
> Michigan-based Weyco, Inc. announced his plan to implement a $1,000
> charge for employees who report that their spouses smoke. Weyco reached
> national fame earlier this year when it implemented a policy by which
> any employees who smoke were given one year to quit, or be fired. Three
> employees who failed to quit smoking were indeed fired earlier this
> year.
>
> According to the interview, employees are not only asked whether they
> smoke, but Breathalyzer-type tests are administered to confirm that
> they do not smoke.
>
> It appears that the reporter was jokingly asking if Weyco would begin
> requiring spouses of employees not to smoke, and he was quite surprised
> when the Weyco president responded: "Yes." He explained that such
> employees would not be fired, but that they would be assessed a $1,000
> penalty for their spouse smoking.
>
> The Rest of the Story
>
> This is absolutely insane.
>
> I have already condemned the policy of firing employees who smoke or
> not hiring smokers as a policy, but even for those anti-smoking groups
> or advocates who support those policies, this has got to be viewed as
> being ridiculously inappropriate.
>
> Now, we are not only going to interfere with the privacy of
> individual's lawful, off-the-job behavior but we are going to interfere
> into the personal lives of their spouses.
>
> I think it will be interesting to see if anti-smoking groups come out
> and condemn this degree of intrusion into individual privacy.
>
> Given the extent of employment discrimination and privacy intrusion
> against smokers that is going on (see yesterday's post about the WHO's
> policy of no longer hiring smokers), I have come to the decision that,
> despite my extreme reluctance to support a legislative approach to
> regulate employment policies, it is now necessary to intervene to
> protect these types of unwarranted intrusions into individual
> employee's privacy and this extent of employment discrimination.
>
> For this reason, I now actively support SB381, legislation introduced
> into the Michigan legislature by state Senator Verg Bernero, which
> would prevent employers from making off-the-job legal behavior a
> condition of employment, except in cases where that behavior directly
> affects job performance or relates to the mission of a company. That
> bill has been stalled in committee, but I hope that the WHO story and
> the continuing Weyco saga bring it out for active debate.
>
> And I hope that anti-smoking groups in Michigan will either support
> that legislation, or unequivocally condemn the policies of Weyco, which
> represent exactly the kind of employment discrimination that we have
> worked for decades to try to prevent.


It's enough to turn ya into a democrat, I tell ya! Activist republicans -
as I live and breathe. hahahahaha

I mean this is a slippery slope. Next thing ya know we'll be slinking back
to communism by enforcing overtime pay, mandating worker-safety, having a
liveable minimum wage, pensions that actually have money in them, sick days
off, vacations - the list goes on.

Paul


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Work in Michigan, Get Fired, Or fined?....
    ... > Michigan-based Weyco, Inc. announced his plan to implement a $1,000 ... > charge for employees who report that their spouses smoke. ... > any employees who smoke were given one year to quit, ... > And I hope that anti-smoking groups in Michigan will either support ...
    (alt.smokers.cigars)
  • Work in Michigan, Get Fired, Or fined?....
    ... Weyco Announces Plan to Charge Employees if their Spouses ... charge for employees who report that their spouses smoke. ...
    (alt.smokers.cigars)
  • Re: Death by Communism
    ... violence if I smoke somewhere that you wouldn't even go into ... everyone,customers and employees? ... particularly abhorent for government to tell private clubs what they ... The right to breathe clean air does trump his right to smoke. ...
    (sci.electronics.design)
  • Re: The problem is not the computers.
    ... employers have to provide a smoke free working environment for their ... employees, even if all the employees are smokers. ...
    (alt.sysadmin.recovery)
  • Re: OT More form filling
    ... >>> which category every business fell in to, and then making sure you sent ... >> But Kay, why do they need to know that our employees smoke, don't smoke or ... >> our employees and customers? ... >> can't imagine what the point of this doubtlessly expensive exercise was! ...
    (uk.rec.gardening)