In local news they were discussing a company who is firing its employees because they smoke. Apparently the company made an announcement saying that all employees had a year to either quit smoking or lose their job. Now, I think that smoking is a disgusting thing and personally I think it'* a bad idea, but I do not think that anyone should lose their job just because they're a smoker. The company was conducting a type of test to see if the people had recently smoked. This wasn't a company that it should even make a difference either. What do you guys think? Should this company have the right to fire an employee because they choose to smoke outside of work, wether it be at work or anywhere else?

here'* a link to the news story:
http://www.woodtv.com/Global/story.asp?*=2858548

I actually agree with the companies.
Here in Troy all public places are smoke-free. In my work you are not allowed to smoke. Only if you go outside.

Now, if you smoke at your own time and place, outside of school/work, that'* another story. But still, smoking rules and laws should be enforced. And I agree with the companies.

I heard about this too, Custom.

This is discrimination. I see this going to the Supreme Court.

I'm not a smoker, but I 100% disagree with the decision of the company.

im not a smoker nor have i ever been, i think that the complanies were wrong to an extent, somtimes when someone smokes they have a very bad stench, and this is due to smoking to often, and my nose burns to just be around those people, but the rest are fine, i think that the company should only fire those that smell like there still smoking (not just a light smoke smell) after they are done, because, they are taking too much time smoking, and they are distracting other workers, ive only met a few people that fall into the catagory of should be fired, so i would have to disagree about the article.

My son worked for one of those "Home Improvement" stores and they tried to tell everyone that they had a certain amount of time to quit smoking or else.

I am a former smoker and while I can't handle the smell of the smoke I think that people should have the right to smoke in their own house/car as long as it doesn't bother anyone else. I think restaurants that have a smoking/non-smoking section are a joke cuz the smoke fills the whole room.

This is discrimination at its finest. I've been waiting for the lawsuits to start but nothing so far.

It all comes down to proper management and policies. If the company feels that smoking privledges are being abused or that smell is becoming an issue, then implement guidelines. Then, there'* at least justification for dismissal if the guidelines aren't met. Until then, it'* simply discrimination.

As a pack a day smoker, I'm saying **** them. And their mothers. And their grandmothers if they don't shut the **** up. What if the lovely public decided one day that coffee was unhealthy and you got fired for drinking it? It'* ******* bullshit and someone deserves to be bitch slapped. Repeatedly. Maybe you guys didn't notice the fact that the company in question fired people for smoking in the privacy of their own homes, off the clock.

i dont smoke cigarettes but i often enjoy a bowl of massel(tobacco, honey, and fruit flavor) and the occasional ciga. no matter how you look at it, it'* discrimination. as long as the person is a productive member of the staff and isnt doing anything illegal, they should have no reason to fire them

LOL... Brilliant!!

This is clearly discrimination. If the company were wise they'd hire those folks back before this goes up the judicial branches...

"Discrimination" has been mentioned in the majority of responses so far... but I don't think it fits in this situation. In the legal sense, crying "discrimination" only applies to factors that a person supposedly cannot control... something they are born with (race, age, gender, etc.) and not simply a preference or addiction. Aside from those predefined exceptions, a private company can do (or require its employees to do) anything they want to... if employees don't like it, then they can quit. I'm not saying it'* good practice to do so, but legally they can.

I remember this exact topic coming up in the news several years ago, it'* nothing new. I wouldn't be surprised if this time it does turn into a legal battle, since people will sue other people for anything nowadays... but I don't forsee (and hope against) a legal precedence protecting smokers as being the result.