No smoking at Michigan healthcare company, Weyco, Inc. They reserve the right to fire employees who smoke at work or at home. Weyco just fired four employees who refused to take a test to determine whether they smoked or not. The company doesn't want to pay for their higher health insurance.
Part of me says, hey, folks don't hafta work if they don't like it. Part of me says, what will other legal behavior will companies start restricting because it's an inconvenience to them? I guess if they restricted it to activities, which verifiably cost the company a greater amount, I may not have a problem with it. I mean, think about the smokers you know who go on all those smoke breaks. That costs the company money, too.
Your thoughts? Am I being a meanie by leaning towards, let the company do what they want in this case? If the government were telling people they couldn't smoke, I'd be more concerned.
(Via Pike Speak)