Cleveland Clinic completely non-smoking....

[poky]

DH told me he found out at orientation yesterday that as of last week, the Cleveland Clinic has a policy of not hiring anyone who smokes, and will not allow anyone who does smoke to smoke on the premises (this part might not be quite as recent; it wasn't clear to me). So current employees who smoke and take a smoke break have to get off the property to do it...and it is *not* in a great neighborhood.

As a nonsmoker who's very sensitive to cigarette smoke, I think it's a great move on their part, but I realize it can be a really tough habit to break, so I'm curious what y'all think.

[SuzySunshine]

Mayo is smoke free as well and has been for years. I don't know about the not hiring smokers, that sounds like a lawsuit to me.

But you can not smoke within 15 feet of any entrance to the Mayo Clinic even if its a back delivery door. The city just passed an ordinance that extends that to the whole city so that will be very nice when it goes into effect in October.

[DCJenn]

I think it's a great idea- even as a former smoker who LOVED everything about the habit.

I'm not sure how they can truly know that someone is a non-smoker at the time of hire. I suppose if there is a statement that they have to sign that they're a non-smoker and it's proven otherwise, I guess that could be grounds for termination. but what about those people who REALLY only have the occasional cigarette (I was never one of them).

In the long-term I think it's a positive move.

The military hospitals are smoke-free and there are these little huts strategically placed for the smokers to go outside. But the military has a long way to go to promote no tobacco use, anyway.

Jenn

[Rapunzel]

Wasn't there something that happened a few years back regarding a company that wouldn't hire smokers because of the medical insurance premuims/prices involved for covering smoking employees???

I wonder how that turned out.

Perhaps THAT is the underlying reason for not hiring smokers at the Cleveland Clinic (which, I imagine, is probably a fairly large employer in the area for support staff).

[Rapunzel]

The military hospitals are smoke-free and there are these little huts strategically placed for the smokers to go outside. But the military has a long way to go to promote no tobacco use, anyway.

I remember that my grandfather (who served in WWII) got cigarettes as part of his army rations. That was back when tobacco was still thought to be beneficial. Of couse, this grandfather went on to have THREE congestive heart failures. The third one killed him....

I could see an argument that the clinic promotes health and wellness and smoking employees is not consistent with that. However, I don't know how you could refuse to hire someone because they smoke during their personal time.

I'm all for the smoking bans. I hate it when people hover by the doors smoking and you have to walk through a cloud of it to get in. A 15' rule is nice and an all out ban on the premises even better.

C'mon Poky - THAT's not a bad neighborhood (not a great one, but if you're out in daylight you should be fine).

Back to the topic at hand: they've been moving towards it for years, and sent out letters to employees (DH was a pseudo employee as part of his fellowship in 2004-2005) warning them about it. I know KU is moving in the same direction. As a healthcare facility, it seems to make sense to move in that direction. Dr. Cosgrove (the head of CCF - also my mother's a$$hole surgeon who cracked her chest twice but never spent enough time with us for me to be able to pick him out of a lineup) started to make these changes as soon as he took over. His first step was to boot McDonalds out of the cafeteria, and then he started on the smoking thing.

As far as firing smokers, I do agree it will probably turn into a lawsuit, but one that needs to happen to lessen the control of the cigarette companies.

[Sheherezade]

This policy only recently went in to effect. It was all over the papers here a few weeks back. I believe that current smoking employees have to give evidence of entering a cessation program or something along those lines. they have to quit eventually to continue working there. They are testing for nicotine - apparently. That shocked me. They are lumping nicotine in to "drug testing". Bold move.

I do believe that the savings from insurance has been a motivator.....at least the opinion pages in the Dealer have mentioned it. :>

I'm watching this story with interest. Should be good.

[SuzySunshine]

As much money as nicotine related illness cost this country on a daily basis it should be lumped in with drug testing IMO.

Angie, is there any mention of how tobacco using spouses of employees are treated? If health care costs and insurance are part of the motivation, smoking spouses could be a sizeable chunk of health care costs as well.

Are the cessation programs paid for by the Clinic or insurance?

[reciprocity]

I'm pretty sure I've seen signs that indicate that the medical campus at Northwestern and U Chicago are both fully non-smoking, but I don't think they enforce it very much.

I can't imagine that there is not an ACLU lawyer all over this.

Taking away our civil liberties is a slippery slope people.

Wowza ... neven expected to see the ACLU invoked in a positive way from Tara! Full of surprises every day!!

I can see both sides - and do see where you're going with what will be next on the hit list. HOWEVER, I see nicotine as a damaging drug with no positive side that people were led to believe was safe and non-addictive. I see it as more of a way to lessen the political pull of the cigarette companies.

And Cosgrove did pull the McDonalds out as well ....

I'm not a smoker and don't have smokers in my family but I will defend their right to smoke and to have jobs where they are not required to quit. Smoking does not make someone a less competent employee. I can't imagine that there is not an ACLU lawyer all over this.

ITA, Tara.

I imagine that costs related to obesity are significant. I wrote a paper on that a while back. I can't remember if I included smoking related disease. I'll have to check.

[Phoebe]

DH's hospital system is tobacco-free. I agree with smoking bans in public places, but not with hiring only non-smokers. I agree with the slippery slope statement.

Jennifer

[reciprocity]

As long as they're at-will employees, I don't think that "smoker" is a protected class, so I'm not sure what rights they are taking away.

I mean, it's not like you have a right to employment. They can keep smoking, just not while having that job.