Sacked for being a smoker
A woman was sacked 45 minutes after starting her new job - because she was a smoker. Sophie Blinman, 21, who smokes five to 10 cigarettes a day, was dismissed on the spot by bosses despite pledging not to light up in the office. Bosses at Dataflow Communications in Wells, Somerset, said: "If someone is found to smoke, even in their own time, they will not work for the company. Legally, we're entitled to do this. It's positive discrimination, and we're proud of it."
Simon Clark, director of smokers' rights group FOREST, said: "It's one thing to have a no smoking policy, another to refuse to employ a smoker. What's going to happen next? Are firms going to refuse to employ fat people? It is straightforward discrimination, but it appears smokers are the one minority group with no rights whatsoever."
Sources: Daily Mirror, Yahoo News (23 December 2005)
posted by Simon Clark @ 17:48
6 comments
6 Comments:
I just read Simon Clark's alleged comments on Yahoo News. This is what he's quoted as saying:
"What's going to happen next? Are firms going to refuse to employ fat people? It is straightforward discrimination, but it appears smokers are the one minority group with no rights whatsoever."
In some respects I agree with the old adage that says "You should be able to do anything you want if you're not hurting anyone".
However it's ironic that while a smoker feels like they are being victimised it is they who are taking away the choice of others to breath clean air and not have to smell the sickly smell on the clothes hair and breath of a co worker.
As I have a sense of smell it makes me retch when our office smoker come and leans over me and talks. A fat person doesn't have this effect. If they did stink of BO for example they'd probably be asked politely and privately to go home and wash.
Also the "not hurting anyone" part doesn't apply in cases where a family member is running the risk of cancer and gives the finger to medical advice only to die of cancer leaving his wife and kids without a father.
My mum gave up after 33 years and she's loving it. She commented on a smell that she hadn't smelled since childhood - the blossom on the trees.
Maybe Simon Clark should have had a cigarette prior to making such an idiotic statement! When a fat person eats the people around them don't suffer from passive eating and become fat themselves.
Also some people cannot help being fat due to damage to the pancreas or other complications and will usually be doing something to help the situation that in no way degenerates the health of others around them.
If you want to smoke then fine smoke, just don't expect to want or have to be a part of it, do it on your own, like you used to when you probably started at school.
Nathaniel and David appear to have got the wrong end of the stick with Simon Clark's comments, all he was pointing out that it is ludicrous not to employ a person because they smoke. This would simply discriminate against one in four of the adult workforce - there isn't enough talent around at the moment. The young woman, in question, was smoking in her own time. No company or organisational should be able to dictate how you live your life outside of work. Would either Nathiel or David want to work for a company like Datafloss or whatever their name is and become another piece of industrial fodder?
Nathaniel
".......the choice of others to breath clean air and not have to smell the sickly smell on the clothes hair and breath of a co worker."
Does that mean I could discrimate against you, and sack you, simply because I didn't like your choice of aftershave or because you had a chicken madras for tea the night before?
".......only to die of cancer leaving his wife and kids without a father." so if this woman promised never to have kids or get married, it would be Ok for her to smoke in her own time?
has the basic fact that this woman has been sacked because in her own time she chooses partake in a perfectly legal activity completely bypassed you? SHE is the victim, SHE is the one being hurt.
David
"When a fat person eats the people around them don't suffer from passive eating and become fat themselves.
Please don't tell me you actually believe that this company's policy is driven by anything other than the misguided belief that a non-smoker will take less sick days???? That, plus the fact that they've secured themselves a multi-million pound advertisign campaign and it hasn't cost them a penny!
This woman was not sacked because here habit was potentially dangerous to her workmates therefore your comparison to other people not getting fat when a fat person eats is nonsensical. Yes I agree this is often caused by medical conditions however, that doesn't mean that their "condition" doesn't affect others around them. Have you ever been stuck on a long haul flight next to a 20 man? I have and it was the most uncomfortable 14 hours of my life. However, a fat person is entitled to a holiday, the same as a smoker is still entitled to a job.
Well said Claire, wish I could write my feelings as well as yourself. I have no problem whatsoever with bigger people, I also am not dim enough to believe it is all food related either. But I may decide that those who are in favour of a blanket ban,who are on the large size, my tolerance may change.
I think they see her as a potential risk even if she says she won't smoke. I believe if she did the company could be liable to a £2500 fine. I could be wrong but that is how I read it. The smokers 'freedom of choice' argument is a non-starter as surely the non-smokers right to breath natural air surpasses that. It's difficult.
Post a Comment
<< Home