Just a follow up to my post last night on the "smokers tax"...
I was listening to the Laura Ingraham show this morning on my way into the office. Larry Mareno (guest host) was interviewing the owner of a health services company that has instituted a program designed to reduce the company's heath care costs by prohibiting (as a condition of employment) company employees from smoking. Not on the job, not after hours -NEVER. If you want to work here you must not smoke! Several employess quit and two were fired as a result of their breaking the terms of employment.
Now, as an ex-smoker and as a conservative, I think that what this gentleman did was ok. He is excercising his private property rights and his rights as a business owner, as long as it is not against the law (which I understand it is not according to the interview) he can hire who he wants - or at least that is how it is supposed to be....
What upset me about the segment was a caller. This caller stated that this action should be mandatory for all business owners! That in the name of "heath care" all businesses should be forced to test their employees for cigarette use. Regardless of the fact that mandatory testing for ILLEGAL drugs is considered an "invasion of privacy" this moron wants business owners to test for LEGAL substance use. What's next? Making Big Mac consumption a reason to terminate employment?
The big argument against municipal smoking bans is that the bans infringe on the property rights of the business (bar and restaurant) owner to do with his property as he sees fit. Maybe we need to take these smoking bans to court. If it is legal for employers to mandate their business to be no smoking areas, there certainly is no reason why a business owner couldn't be within their rights to do the opposite, is there?
posted by The Lady Logician at 4:04 PM permalink
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home