Monday, February 14, 2011


SAD Ireland thinks smoker job discrimination is a huge social step backwards and so do most right thinking people except those blinded by anti-smoker hatred.

I heard about the legal discrimination of smokers at work reported in the New York Times but the Stand FAST blog has taken a deeper look into the problem of discrimination in the workplace against smokers.

It seems that many "healthcare" (I use that word loosely because although these zealots may work in health, they certainly don't care) employers have moved from attacking smoking to smokers themselves. It's all part of the wider "Denormalisation" plan that promotes "Smokers as employer liabilities".

Not only have they refused to hire smokers - who may only smoke in their own time - but they are also threatening to sack any smoker who doesn't quit and force them to take urine tests to detect traces of a legal product:

...the “No Smokers Need Apply” policies are not restricted to new hires. In some instances, employers are demanding that smokers quit their habit or face the prospect of unemployment. In some cases, employers are demanding urine tests, intended to detect traces of nicotine, a perfectly legal substance, from those seeking employment and, in some cases, from those who may already be employed who want to keep their job.

These employers, which include the American Lung Association, the American Cancer Society and a growing number of hospital and health care facilities, believe they have a right to dictate what activities employees may indulge in their free time.

The anti-smoker zealots justify these gross intrusions into the personal lives of potential employees (and existing employees) by pointing out the need to “increase worker productivity, reduce health care costs and encourage healthier living.”

The (New York) Times article insinuates that the shift from smoke-free workplaces to smoker free workplaces is a new phenomena. “The policies reflect a frustration that softer efforts — like banning smoking on company grounds, offering cessation programs and increasing health care premiums for smokers — have not been powerful-enough incentives to quit.”

But, in fact, the uncompromising vindictiveness of the zealots has been characteristic of the euphemistically named “tobacco control” movement from the very beginning. They have carefully crafted a propaganda campaign which portrays smokers as social misfits - addicts, aggressively spreading their contagion to a non-smoking population and jeopardizing the lives of children.

Offering jobs to non-smokers only is increasing in the UK as well and the Govt is doing nothing to protect smokers from such blatant discrimination. I'd like to know if they really think we are incapable of doing our jobs because we are smokers. After all, who the hell won two world wars, built the first tank, and engineered just about every great thing this country has ever been known for? Smokers of course because back in our glory days most people did it.

In The UK, things have moved further towards "quit or jail". The first piece of the plan is likely to be put in place in a couple of days when a bigoted council in Suffolk decides whether to impose a "fine or quit" policy on those it harasses in the street or at work.

None of this is ultimately about health - it's about hate. For me and many other smokers, it's not about smoking - it's about the right to be left alone to live in peace without fear or prejudice.

Is there no Govt that will give us that at least?

UPDATE - StandFAST reports that non-smoking employee spouses of smokers are also contagious. I think the aim is to break up marriages by such covert means so that smokers will be isolated further. Divorce or quit is also a strong quit motivator to some.