Comments on: Should Your Employer Be Allowed To Fire You If You Smoke ? http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/12/09/should-your-employer-be-allowed-to-fire-you-if-you-smoke/ Life. Liberty. Property. Defending individual freedom and liberty, one post at a time. Wed, 08 Feb 2012 17:04:34 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: John Newman http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/12/09/should-your-employer-be-allowed-to-fire-you-if-you-smoke/#comment-4269 John Newman Mon, 11 Dec 2006 15:26:50 +0000 http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/12/09/should-your-employer-be-allowed-to-fire-you-if-you-smoke/#comment-4269 Adam, we don't know what the status is of smoking employees hired before Scott decided not to hire smokers. However, if they are required to stop smoking, Scott reneged on their contract, and if they are not required to stop smoking, Scott's contract contains discriminatory policy against new hires. Either way.... Adam, we don’t know what the status is of smoking employees hired before Scott decided not to hire smokers. However, if they are required to stop smoking, Scott reneged on their contract, and if they are not required to stop smoking, Scott’s contract contains discriminatory policy against new hires. Either way….

]]> By: VRB http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/12/09/should-your-employer-be-allowed-to-fire-you-if-you-smoke/#comment-4252 VRB Sun, 10 Dec 2006 23:10:23 +0000 http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/12/09/should-your-employer-be-allowed-to-fire-you-if-you-smoke/#comment-4252 Another thing that worries me, is that employment is more and more determined by your credit score, background checks from companies you have no idea whether the info is right, every comment that you make on blogs, personality, drug and lie detector tests. Also, your skills are approved by software. With all this information about you, you could be fired without anticipating an offense. To be employed now, one has no private life. Another thing that worries me, is that employment is more and more determined by your credit score, background checks from companies you have no idea whether the info is right, every comment that you make on blogs, personality, drug and lie detector tests. Also, your skills are approved by software. With all this information about you, you could be fired without anticipating an offense. To be employed now, one has no private life.

]]> By: Adam Selene http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/12/09/should-your-employer-be-allowed-to-fire-you-if-you-smoke/#comment-4251 Adam Selene Sun, 10 Dec 2006 22:55:25 +0000 http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/12/09/should-your-employer-be-allowed-to-fire-you-if-you-smoke/#comment-4251 Employment is a contract, regardless of whether you sign something. That's part of common law, which is why you can sue an employer for wrongful termination, for example. Aside from that, if you and I reach agreement on the price of a car that you own and I wish to buy, we do so verbally and we shake hands, have we created <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contract" rel="nofollow">a contract</a> between us? Employment is a contract, regardless of whether you sign something. That’s part of common law, which is why you can sue an employer for wrongful termination, for example. Aside from that, if you and I reach agreement on the price of a car that you own and I wish to buy, we do so verbally and we shake hands, have we created a contract between us?

]]> By: VRB http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/12/09/should-your-employer-be-allowed-to-fire-you-if-you-smoke/#comment-4250 VRB Sun, 10 Dec 2006 22:49:20 +0000 http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/12/09/should-your-employer-be-allowed-to-fire-you-if-you-smoke/#comment-4250 Adam, Yes! Did he sign anything when he became employed, is being employed an implied contract? I don't know the legal aspects of what you are saying. I am just asking in trying to understand. Adam,
Yes!

Did he sign anything when he became employed, is being employed an implied contract? I don’t know the legal aspects of what you are saying. I am just asking in trying to understand.

]]> By: Adam Selene http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/12/09/should-your-employer-be-allowed-to-fire-you-if-you-smoke/#comment-4245 Adam Selene Sun, 10 Dec 2006 22:11:47 +0000 http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/12/09/should-your-employer-be-allowed-to-fire-you-if-you-smoke/#comment-4245 I'm not trying to make them look like anything John. Except for one thing. THIS employee is trying to renege on a contract freely entered into. I’m not trying to make them look like anything John. Except for one thing. THIS employee is trying to renege on a contract freely entered into.

]]> By: John Newman http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/12/09/should-your-employer-be-allowed-to-fire-you-if-you-smoke/#comment-4244 John Newman Sun, 10 Dec 2006 21:36:34 +0000 http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/12/09/should-your-employer-be-allowed-to-fire-you-if-you-smoke/#comment-4244 I certainly wouldn't want a property rights hating 'artificial entity' forced to associate with an actual person. If you believe government intervention and regulation in the health industry is the problem, quit trying to make the employee look like the problem. I certainly wouldn’t want a property rights hating ‘artificial entity’ forced to associate with an actual person.

If you believe government intervention and regulation in the health industry is the problem, quit trying to make the employee look like the problem.

]]> By: Adam Selene http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/12/09/should-your-employer-be-allowed-to-fire-you-if-you-smoke/#comment-4238 Adam Selene Sun, 10 Dec 2006 20:44:17 +0000 http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/12/09/should-your-employer-be-allowed-to-fire-you-if-you-smoke/#comment-4238 If you happen to think that a company should be forced to associate with individuals as you see fit, sure thing John. Aside from that, I would say that the massive government intervention and regulation of the health insurance market is what has actually created this situation. If you happen to think that a company should be forced to associate with individuals as you see fit, sure thing John.

Aside from that, I would say that the massive government intervention and regulation of the health insurance market is what has actually created this situation.

]]> By: John Newman http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/12/09/should-your-employer-be-allowed-to-fire-you-if-you-smoke/#comment-4237 John Newman Sun, 10 Dec 2006 20:42:28 +0000 http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/12/09/should-your-employer-be-allowed-to-fire-you-if-you-smoke/#comment-4237 Adam, it was you who was defending anti-freedom policies of companies. Adam, it was you who was defending anti-freedom policies of companies.

]]> By: Adam Selene http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/12/09/should-your-employer-be-allowed-to-fire-you-if-you-smoke/#comment-4232 Adam Selene Sun, 10 Dec 2006 20:26:31 +0000 http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/12/09/should-your-employer-be-allowed-to-fire-you-if-you-smoke/#comment-4232 John: What recourse do you suggest they have? VRB: Do you really think that is what would happen? John: What recourse do you suggest they have?

VRB: Do you really think that is what would happen?

]]> By: VRB http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/12/09/should-your-employer-be-allowed-to-fire-you-if-you-smoke/#comment-4230 VRB Sun, 10 Dec 2006 20:00:22 +0000 http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/12/09/should-your-employer-be-allowed-to-fire-you-if-you-smoke/#comment-4230 Adam, My question is; does a person have a right to work? From what I gather from what you are saying that a corporation can have any standards they want and for a person to work they would never have any choice, but not to work. That seems to me to be slightly above slavery. From seeing how corporations work, it is alway follow the leader to the lowest common denominator of its maintainability. Adam,
My question is; does a person have a right to work?
From what I gather from what you are saying that a corporation can have any standards they want and for a person to work they would never have any choice, but not to work. That seems to me to be slightly above slavery. From seeing how corporations work, it is alway follow the leader to the lowest common denominator of its maintainability.

]]> By: John Newman http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/12/09/should-your-employer-be-allowed-to-fire-you-if-you-smoke/#comment-4229 John Newman Sun, 10 Dec 2006 19:58:57 +0000 http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/12/09/should-your-employer-be-allowed-to-fire-you-if-you-smoke/#comment-4229 Adam, I thought this was the issue of contracts between employer and employee, but.... I'm curious, if the company policy required all employees to smoke three packs of cigarettes a day, should non-smoking applicants have any recourse against hiring practices? Adam, I thought this was the issue of contracts between employer and employee, but….
I’m curious, if the company policy required all employees to smoke three packs of cigarettes a day, should non-smoking applicants have any recourse against hiring practices?

]]> By: Doug Mataconis http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/12/09/should-your-employer-be-allowed-to-fire-you-if-you-smoke/#comment-4227 Doug Mataconis Sun, 10 Dec 2006 19:52:07 +0000 http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/12/09/should-your-employer-be-allowed-to-fire-you-if-you-smoke/#comment-4227 In all this talk about rights and privileges, let's not forget a few things. Nobody has a right to any job, least of all a job on their own terms. The employee in this case was, according to the article, well aware of Scotts' policy before he started working there, signed on to it, and violated it any way. There is no small degree of culpability on his part. Employers have the choice of setting whatever conditions for employment they like. You don't have to accept them. In all this talk about rights and privileges, let’s not forget a few things.

Nobody has a right to any job, least of all a job on their own terms.

The employee in this case was, according to the article, well aware of Scotts’ policy before he started working there, signed on to it, and violated it any way. There is no small degree of culpability on his part.

Employers have the choice of setting whatever conditions for employment they like. You don’t have to accept them.

]]> By: Adam Selene http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/12/09/should-your-employer-be-allowed-to-fire-you-if-you-smoke/#comment-4220 Adam Selene Sun, 10 Dec 2006 19:17:06 +0000 http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/12/09/should-your-employer-be-allowed-to-fire-you-if-you-smoke/#comment-4220 Did the employee agree to it? If not, then why would it be legal? You tackled my comment about legal privileges, which stems from me tackling VRB's comments about "corporate rights". That is what led me to think we are disconnecting. Other than that, I'm confused. I'm talking about freedom of association and you seem to be implying that I'm arguing that corporations should have the ability to violate individual rights. Why not debate what I'm saying rather than what you imply I'm saying? Did the employee agree to it? If not, then why would it be legal?

You tackled my comment about legal privileges, which stems from me tackling VRB’s comments about “corporate rights”. That is what led me to think we are disconnecting.

Other than that, I’m confused. I’m talking about freedom of association and you seem to be implying that I’m arguing that corporations should have the ability to violate individual rights. Why not debate what I’m saying rather than what you imply I’m saying?

]]> By: John Newman http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/12/09/should-your-employer-be-allowed-to-fire-you-if-you-smoke/#comment-4219 John Newman Sun, 10 Dec 2006 19:12:27 +0000 http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/12/09/should-your-employer-be-allowed-to-fire-you-if-you-smoke/#comment-4219 Adam, I don't see where I used the word 'rights.' Does the employer have the privilege to make sure the employee follows the company's employment policies? Since the employee doesn't have a 'right' to that job, shouldn't it be the company's privilege to place spy cameras in the employee's home to make sure the employee conforms to his employment requirements? Adam, I don’t see where I used the word ‘rights.’ Does the employer have the privilege to make sure the employee follows the company’s employment policies? Since the employee doesn’t have a ‘right’ to that job, shouldn’t it be the company’s privilege to place spy cameras in the employee’s home to make sure the employee conforms to his employment requirements?

]]> By: Adam Selene http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/12/09/should-your-employer-be-allowed-to-fire-you-if-you-smoke/#comment-4216 Adam Selene Sun, 10 Dec 2006 18:56:56 +0000 http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/12/09/should-your-employer-be-allowed-to-fire-you-if-you-smoke/#comment-4216 Sorry John, I think there is a disconnect. I'm arguing that corporations, artificial entities, cannot have "rights". I am also quite willing to argue that the individuals who are the managers, directors and owners of corporations have the ability to determine who they will and will not hire. I'm even, as unpopular as I'm sure this will be, willing to argue that a private corporation should be able to hire and fire in a discriminatory manner. Further, I would argue that market forces would correct this far better than laws and regulations. Finally, your question: <blockquote>should Scotts then be allowed to go into that person’s home to check the employee’s computer for pornography. It sounds to me as if you think that would be the company’s ‘privilege.’</blockquote> If it was a condition of employment, and you agreed to it, what would be wrong with it? As far as I can tell, Mr. Scott knew the conditions of employment, including the fact that he would be subjected to testing for nicotine, and agreed to those conditions. Now he wants to use a court to overturn a contract he willingly entered into, without, as far as I know, any duress. On the other hand, if such a condition were not part of the agreed upon conditions of employment, and Scott's entered my home, they would be violating my individual rights to liberty and property, right? Sorry John, I think there is a disconnect. I’m arguing that corporations, artificial entities, cannot have “rights”. I am also quite willing to argue that the individuals who are the managers, directors and owners of corporations have the ability to determine who they will and will not hire. I’m even, as unpopular as I’m sure this will be, willing to argue that a private corporation should be able to hire and fire in a discriminatory manner. Further, I would argue that market forces would correct this far better than laws and regulations. Finally, your question:

should Scotts then be allowed to go into that person’s home to check the employee’s computer for pornography. It sounds to me as if you think that would be the company’s ‘privilege.’

If it was a condition of employment, and you agreed to it, what would be wrong with it? As far as I can tell, Mr. Scott knew the conditions of employment, including the fact that he would be subjected to testing for nicotine, and agreed to those conditions. Now he wants to use a court to overturn a contract he willingly entered into, without, as far as I know, any duress.

On the other hand, if such a condition were not part of the agreed upon conditions of employment, and Scott’s entered my home, they would be violating my individual rights to liberty and property, right?

]]>