I came across an interesting article in The New York Times about hospitals and medical businesses in many states adopting strict policies against hiring smokers — Hospitals Shift Smoking Bans to Smoker Ban. I had just had a discussion with a colleague about this topic so it was already on my mind. The Times article notes that
About 1 in 5 Americans still smoke, and smoking remains the leading cause of preventable deaths. And employees who smoke cost, on average, $3,391 more a year each for health care and lost productivity, according to federal estimates.
The Article goes on to quote a hospital executive from Missouri who stopped hiring smokers last month. This set off an alarm bell for me since I know Missouri is on the list of states with off duty conduct statutes that protect smokers from discrimination. As the Times went on to point out, however, the Missouri statute has an exception for “health care organizations.” Actually, the Missouri statute states that “not-for-profit organizations whose principal business is health care promotion shall be exempt.” Perhaps more importantly, the statute also says that “[t]he provisions of this section shall not be deemed to create a cause of action for injunctive relief, damages or other relief.” Thus, it appears that the Missouri hospital executive did his homework.
If your organization is considering a non-smoking hiring policy or any other aggressive anti-smoking policy, it would be wise to review state laws regarding the subject. Of course, that might not be the end of your troubles. Even if state law is no impediment, this kind of policy strikes me as one that invites litigation, perhaps in the form of a disparate impact claim based on statistical differences in smoking rates in local labor pools. Also, these kind of policies will be used by unions seeking to organize workers who feel that employers should confine their control of employees to the workplace. On a broader policy level, perhaps Mark Twain was right when he responded to the anti-smoking movement of his day: “I haven't a particle of confidence in a man who has no redeeming petty vices whatever.”
- Partner
Mark Chumley has experience representing clients in all aspects of labor and employment law. He has handled numerous cases before state and federal courts and state and federal civil rights agencies, including claims involving ...
Topics/Tags
Select- Labor & Employment Law
- Pregnancy Discrimination
- Coronavirus
- Labor Law
- Employment Law
- Wage & Hour
- Privacy
- National Labor Relations Board
- Department of Labor
- Reasonable Accommodation
- Workplace Accommodations
- NLRB
- FMLA
- Employment Litigation
- Medical Marijuana
- Employee Benefits and Executive Compensation
- Arbitration
- Religion Discrimination
- Workplace Violence
- Discrimination
- Medical Cannabis Dispensaries
- IRS
- Litigation
- Whistleblower
- Disability Discrimination
- Social Media
- Employer Policies
- Americans with Disabilities Act
- United States Supreme Court
- Federal Trade Commission
- Retirement
- Race Discrimination
- OSHA
- Sexual Orientation Discrimination
- National Labor Relations Act
- Accommodation
- ERISA
- Employer Handbook
- EEOC
- ADAAA
- ACA
- Affordable Car Act
- Unions
- Title VII
- Employer Rules
- Sexual Harassment
- Technology
- Federal Arbitration Act
- NLRA
- Transgender Issues
- 401(k)
- Disability
- Employment Settlement Agreements
- Sixth Circuit
- Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
- Fair Labor Standards Act
- Paycheck Protection Program
- Securities Law
- Benefits
- Class Action Litigation
- Gender Identity Discrimination
- Posting Requirements
- Disability Law
- Preventive Care Benefits
- Health Savings Account
- E-Discovery
- Evidence
- SECURE Act
- US Department of Labor Employee Benefits Security Administration
- Family and Medical Leave Act
- Environmental Law
- Privacy Laws
- Overtime Pay
- Representative Election Regulations
- Department of Justice
- Healthcare Reform
- Older Workers' Benefit Protection Act (OWBPA)
- Affirmative Action
- Electronically Stored Information
- Equal Opportunity Clause
- Telecommuting
- Compensable Time
- Occupational Safety and Health Administration
- Security Screening
- Supreme Court
- E-Discovery Case Law
- Electronic Data Discovery
- ESI
- Attendance Policy
- Return to Work
- Seniority Rights
- Unemployment Insurance Integrity Act
- American Medical Association
- Classification
- Confidentiality
- Equal Pay
- Fair Minimum Wage
- Federal Minimum Wage
- Genetic Information Discrimination
- Media Policy
- Misclassification
- National Origin Discrimination
- Retaliation
- State Minimum Wage
- Wage Increase
- Disability Leave
- Social Media Content
- Taxation
- Antitrust
- Employment Incentives
- HIRE Act
- Social Security Tax
Recent Posts
- EEOC Announces Final Rule Providing Guidelines under the PWFA
- The Practical Employment Law Podcast: Immediate Termination
- The Practical Employment Law Podcast: Labor & Employment Law Update February 2024
- The Practical Employment Law Podcast: Telephone Game
- The Practical Employment Law Podcast: Labor & Employment Law Update January 2024
- The Practical Employment Law Podcast: Employment Law Issues to Watch in 2024
- Department of Labor Announces New Independent Contractor Rule to Go into Effect March 11, 2024
- The Practical Employment Law Podcast: The Employment Law Naughty & Nice List
- The Practical Employment Law Podcast: Reefer Madness
- The Practical Employment Law Podcast: The Office Romance Episode