Smoking Discrimination - Truth or Fiction for HR Departments?

If you're like me, one of the things that keeps you up at night is the cost of healthcare.  So much so, I've followed the recent news that companies have begun to penalize smokers and employees with other risk factors (high cholesterol, high blood pressure, etc.) with great interest.  It seems like an eventual fact that those who display voluntary risk factors will pay via higher employee contributions/premiums than employees who don't engage in the same risky behavior.

Of course, smoking's the easy one, since it's safely classified as voluntary.  The other health metrics (blood  pressure, etc) are more problematic, since heredity and other factors are at play.

So, Open Enrollment season is upon us.  I didn't take the leap and consider raising employee contributions for those that smoke, and certainly didn't raise them for poor scores in the health metrics.

The biggest issue for me?  I'm at a startup, and I know all the people who work at our company.  It's one thing to mandate increased premiums for smokers when you are sitting in the Death Star of a Fortune 500, it's another thing all together when you see those that smoke every day.  Much tougher to make the business decision that probably will ultimately be necessary or routine as an early adapter when you are at a place where everybody knows your name...

So, it's no to increased premiums for smokers this year, and yes to finding a toehold for a cessation program sometime soon. 

Then I see the following information - Health Populi puts the true cost of smoking at $222 per pack over a lifetime...

Maybe I'm doing no one a favor by waiting another year to be more aggressive.....

Comments

[Michael Haberman]

Kris:
Interesting article you linked to. You are definately not doing anyone a favor by delaying smoking cessation and you are not doing the company any favor either. I would suggest you look at a smoking cessation program, perhaps tied into an overall wellness program, that you can link to the first of the year when everyone is making those new year resolutions. Weight is another factor you can cover. So smoke-enders and weight watchers?

[Scott]

As a former smoker, but not an HR Pro, at first I agreed with the idea. The reason I quit was to reduce my risks.

Then I started thinking, how far do you go penalizing people's lifestyles to save the company money.

Would you charge your CEO more for insurance knowing that he is an avid extreme skier?

What if your CFO was a stunt pilot on the weekends? Or maybe a flight instructor in his spare time?

These are voluntary activities.

How about just two kids per family to reduce costs? After two kids you pay 4 times what the single employees pay. How would that be for a recruiting tool?

This is a tough issue. I understand HR Pros must walk a fine line between cost and benefits, but stop trying to dictate people's lifestyles just so you can get a quarterly bonus for making insurance premiums drop.

I can already feel the comments flaming me now.

BTW, thanks Kris for not making all the smokers at Source mad.

[Kevin]

Failing to act simply proves Hammond right in his infamous Fast Company article, "Why We Hate HR." After all, he describes four things that HR professionals do poorly, two of which apply here...

1. HR pursues efficiency in lieu of value. Why? Because it's easier - and easier to measure.
2. HR pursues standardization and uniformity in the face of a workforce that is heterogeneous and complex.

Of course we should differentiate, and at every opportunity...

- Benefits based on the employee's life choices (smoking, weight, number of family members, historical usage, and even strapping one's feet to sticks and plummeting down a snow-covered mountain)
- Rewards based on the employee's preference (not everyone likes the reserved parking space)
- Pay based on the employee's performance - meeting performance goals does not justify receiving the overall merit increase budget percentage (e.g., 3.75% if that's what the company has to manage to)
- Vacation days based on tenure in one's profession, not tenure at the company where they currently reside (reward seasoned professionals for choosing to join your company)
- Etc...

[jane]

I recently was up for a job with GEI. I was one of two candidates and was not chosen because the employer asked one reference if I smoked. It happened to be the only job in twenty years I have ever taken what was a scheduled smoke break for the office. I was more qualified than the other candidate. I am mortified, angry and feel discriminated against. I live in Missouri and they are way behind when it comes to employee rights and labor laws but I would like to fight this. Advise please??

[Seren Griwi]

Flipping screens, moving screen… blah. When do they come up with a screen-only with a virtual keyboard. Just the screen…www.birmarket.com

[Bambi]

Talk about smoking fumes! I am now getting angry about the way I am being discriminated against because I smoke. I have put up with this for some time now, but now I have looked in two cities and can't find a place to live because none of them will rent to me if I smoke! Huh?! Okay, first, most of them are condos with separate ventilation, second, I smoke outside because I don't' want to affect those inside. The message I am getting here is that I could end up homeless if I don't stop smoking. I worked at a homeless shelter at one point in life, and they smoke there for free! How am I expected to pay high CA rents of the tune of $2500 for a decent place and they are going to command what I do? Yes, this is discrimination and it is wrong and it is a big bully! I have friends that died and got cancer only right after they quit and then I have loved ones who smoked all their lives and lived to be past 80 years old! I just wonder why it's okay to drink in bars, but now we smokers have no where to go at all. If health care and health is the big issue, then why do they serve us food that is overwhelming proven to be made from fat, sugar, salt, and preservatives, why do they have bars open for people to drink, and why do they open strip clubs where diseases could be spread? A recent article released shows how cigarette butts can prove to be useful in stopping oil leaks such as the fierce one we are battling now. In addition, I have read that 50% of the tax money from cigarettes goes to pay for much needed social services for people. As a 20 year smoker, I agree that smoke is harmful and I do all I can to respect other people's right to stay smoke free and not be exposed to harmful toxins. I go out of my way to follow the city rules by staying away from buildings, public places, and open doors, you will likely find me in a corner alone. I also put my cigarette out and keep my butt to throw away as soon as I find a trash can to discard (of which more around cities would be helpful.) I am always extremely careful to make sure the butt is not still burning to prevent fire hazards as well. I am tired of being treated like a second class citizen because I smoke. I grew up in a family of smokers, no excuse, and I have been ADDICTED for a long time. I have tried to quit on many occasions, but with layoffs looming, stress at home and work, moving soon, and more, when I try to quit, it truly feels like it would do me in, I would go nuts as I have a mental condition to manage. I am a very charitable person, humanity is my love and I seek ways to and do serve constantly. Yet, people who don't even know me will see me in my corner smoking and give me dirty looks, cough like it is affecting them so far away, and some have even gone as far as to say something mean to me. I feel this is discrimination and unnecessary. I am a person. I have to cope when I am walking to and from work and school with people driving vehicles that are in need of smog and pollution from all of these transportation needs. Believe me, those toxins make me have to hold my breath it is so nasty and harmful. I have had headaches at work when someone sprays their cologne or perfume all around the office, not to mention those who just smell like they haven't bathed in days. In short, we don't all always like what we see and we are all different, different vices to overcome, choices that others may not approve of, etc. How many of us really want anyone to get in our face about it? How many of us don't already understand and are doing the best we can with what we have? I will be respectful of your wishes, please be more understanding and gracious that smoking is an addiction, a disease. Would you treat someone with Aids with such disdain? Oh yes, some of us still do.

[Keeshound]

As someone who almost died inhaling third hand smoke from a co-worker (yes, third hand smoke, not second hand), I don't feel that smoker's should have rights in the workplace. This is truly a habit that can kill not only the smoker but those around them. I spent two hours in an urgent care clinic trying to breathe again. So, are smoker's rights really more important than other people's lives and health???

[Jason Bills]

So Now its third-hand smoke huh? Rediculous,most of the studies of secondhand and now third hand smoke are simply junk sciences trying to incite fear in the public. As a matter fact the choice to take away my rights is not your or anybodys choice. We have certain inalienable rights granted to us by the constitution and according to our forefathers, all tobacco farmers by the way, by God. I think it is ludicrous that you think that my rights should be taken away just because you don't like a particular smell. I am a smoker, a veteran, a supportive husband, and most of all a taxpayer. And I say that you are prejudice. The descrimination that smokers are up against today is closely related to the racism of the past. Only instead of judging based on color, you target a group of the population who is not only considerate with their smoking, but are generally law abiding citizens who want nothing more than to live their lives in a free society, just like we were promised. The fact is that putting restriction on peoples voluntary activities borderline the fascist regimes of the past.