Smokers discriminated against in the workplace, BU professor says

Students who smoke may find themselves unemployed if hiring policies targeting smokers continue, a Boston University professor said in a Jan. 22 article in Tobacco Control, a peer review journal.

BU social and behavioral sciences professor Michael Siegel said hundreds of companies have been implementing policies that prohibit or deter the hiring of smokers. However, not hiring people based on their smoker status is discrimination, Siegel said.

‘Discrimination is essentially the categorical denial of employment to a group, based solely on the membership to that group that is not related to job qualifications,’ he said.

There are 26 states that have laws prohibiting hiring practices that discriminate against smokers, but Massachusetts is not one of them, Siegel said.

‘Right now, Massachusetts has what’s called ‘at-will employment,’ and there’s not protection against this sort of discrimination,’ Siegel said. ‘There’s only protection for race, gender, religion, sexual orientation.’

A former Scotts Lawn Care employee filed a case against the employer for allegedly firing him based on the fact that he is a smoker, according to court documents. The District Court will hearing the pending case on the grounds of invasion of privacy, because the company tested bodily fluids to confirm his smoker status.

Most companies with such policies in place take urine samples to test whether someone smokes cigarettes, Siegel said.’

Fallon Clinic Occupational Medicine Chairperson Robert Swotinsky said though he has never had a request for a nicotine test, it does happen.

‘One of the problems with nicotine testing is you don’t know if its coming from cigarettes, smokeless tobacco, or Nicorette,’ Swotinsky said. ‘Someone could be trying to stop smoking by chewing the gum, and they’d have nicotine in their system.’

Cotinine is the indicator of whether someone has smoked, Siegel said.’ However, cotinine levels can differ depending on the last time someone used tobacco.’ ‘

‘It’s a somewhat arbitrary test,’ he said.

Weyco, a healthcare provider based in Michigan, fired smokers if they did not quit, Siegel said.

‘With most companies, they simply won’t hire someone if they’re a smoker,’ Siegel said. ‘If you worked at Weyco, you got a letter saying, ‘If you don’t quit smoking within a year, you’ll be fired.”

Four employees have been fired as a result of the new policy, Siegel said.

The American Lung Association, which has a policy against hiring smokers but does not fire existing employees based on their smoker statuses, encourages employers to give employees assistance to help them quit smoking, National Policy Manager Thomas Carr said in an email.

‘It would be incompatible with our mission and the public policies we advocate for not to,’ he said

There are a few reasons why companies may employ these hiring practices, Siegel said.

‘One argument is that smokers cost more because they get sick more, and that drives up healthcare expenditures for companies,’ Siegel said.

This creates a dangerous precedent, Siegel said.

‘I think you could make the same argument with obesity,’ he said. ‘Companies could say, ‘We’re not going to hire obese people because we want to promote healthy practices.”

Colleagues have criticized Siegel for speaking out against employment discrimination toward smokers, he said.

‘The tobacco-control field, is a religious-like movement where people who speak out against the dogma are viewed like traitors to the cause,’ Siegel said.’ ‘People have actually accused me of being paid off by tobacco companies.’

Siegel said discriminatory employment policies would not help people quit smoking.

‘What it’s going to do is make it harder for smokers to get jobs, especially with unemployment going up,’ he said.