Is this legal? Or invasion of privacy?

that is ridiculous. fair enough don't smoke IN the hospital, or even during your shift but that is a bit much. what spurious reason have they given for this? and do they know how many doctors and nurses smoke?

I'm not sure how to call this one. I guess it depends on the state labor laws. In a lot of states you can be fired or denied employment for a lot of reasons..up to and including "we just don't like you". Personaly i think what an employe does on their own time is their own business, whether it be smoking, toking, drinking, stripping or what have you. but people all over the place have been fired for all sorts of reasons that you wouldnt think were legal to fire someone over or deny employment to, but did in fact fall with in the boundries of the law.

As far as I'm concerned they SHOULDN'T have the right but I seem to recall other employers - I forget what or where - doing the same thing; in fact, if I'm not mistaken, they may have said anyone working there who smokes now will have so much time to quit or they'll be fired. The made their usual claims, which I can say personal and from my personal observations are BS, that smokers are less productive, miss more time due to illness and cost companies that provide it more for health care. I'm afraid in this "anti-little-people" climate the courts would rule in favor of the employers saying if they're not breaking current discrimination laws they can hire or fire whomever they want. Annie

Personally, I don't feel they have a right to do this, and they should be sued by any applicant that was turned down for smoking. That's discriminatory and wrong. As for the "reduced health care costs" schtick - smokers keep health care costs (related to insurance) low. This isn't about reducing health care costs - it's about imposing their anti-smoking mentality on others.

If I own a company, and it's my company, I can hire, or fire, whom ever I choose, based on whatever rational I choose. It's my company. If you own a car, can you not choose whom you will, or will not allow to drive it? If you own a home, can't you choose who you will or will not allow in it? If you want your lawn mowed, can't you choose whom you will or will not have mow it, regardless of whatever reasons you choose? Of course. So if you don't like the rules, make your own company and hire whom ever you wish, for whatever reason you wish. Btw, this has nothing to do with privacy. Smoking is a very public thing. You think no one else can smell the awful breath of a cig sucker?

its called selective discrimination. Sue them. You cant refuse to hire some one cause there black or gay, so what is the difference?

well i think it is just one of their policy, they are afterall a hospital and they should be promoting good health and i believe that is part of their campaign. if they have been clear about it from the start then you should also be ready to accept that. i don't think that is invasion of privacy the same way that they have only NOT accepted someone who smokes.

I read about a hotel owner in Florida who said "When I found out it wasn't illegal to discriminate against smokers, I stopped hiring people who smoke". He fired employees if he saw them smoking off the property and on their own time. He also said that if it were legal to discriminate against fat people, he wouldn't hire them either. And that's basically it. Society has deemed smokers and the overweight to be unacceptable and a lower class of citizen. They will ban smoking and smokers whenever and wherever they like. Smokers are 20% of the population, which is not enough to carry any political clout. It's easy to tax them, punish them, exile them and refuse them equal rights because the majority thinks they are low class people with no self-control and a dirty habit. They feel equal or worse things about fat people. That is why under rationed care, the overweight will be denied things like elective surgery. Smokers and the obese are already denied some medical services in countries with socialized medicine. Welcome to the brave, new world. The hard, cold fact is that it is now our job to try never to fall into a category of people that the majority dislikes. Discrimination when it's "for our own good" is something society is moving towards. Like, umm... the health care bill that they wanted to force us to have because we weren't smart enough to figure out it was for our own good. My level of disgust with the erosion of personal liberty in the U S grows daily and is now so full that I cannot explain it in mere words. It requires multiple obscene gestures to express.

The next thing will be against what they call obese people. Then a ban on Mcdonalds and other fast food places.

that is so dumb and wrong. i think they shouldnt be allow to do this

I believe that just as a smoker as a right to smoke since it isn't illegal, an employer has a right to hire or refuse to hire anyone they want.

Yes they can do that. But they can't fire you for that. If its a public hospital then its illegal but if its a private hospital its legal. First smoking is dangerous to your health. And as a hospital they must be the one to set an example. Smoking is bad habit. .. Just think If theirs 100 applicants who will you choose if the have same credential? The old person? the young person? social drinker? smoker? married or single? If I'm an employer I will choose a young single person who don't drink and smoke. .. Then will the old person protest because we have same credential why choose him and not me. Same case with the drinker and smoker and married person. Then I ask you who will you choose? Theirs 100 applicant and you only need one? Logic dictates that you choose the best among the 100 applicants.

Well I think they can do that. Employers are looking for certain criteria to their employees and it just happened to be a "non-smoker" criteria. And if you dont want your employer to get involved to the decisions that you make, you just have to quit.