On Monday, July 1, 2013, the University of Pennsylvania Health System joined dozens of hospitals across the country by implementing a ban on hiring smokers. Proponents say such policies lower health care costs and improve employee and community health. Others believe these restrictions may be the beginning of a slippery ethical slope.
Since 2011, hospitals in Florida, Georgia, Massachusetts, Missouri, Ohio, Tennessee and Texas, among others, have stopped hiring smokers and even more are openly considering these policies. These institutions argue that bans on smoking increase productivity, reduce health care costs and encourage healthier living. Indeed, evidence shows that the consequences of smoking cigarettes can affect work environments: employees who smoke, cost on average, $3,391 more a year for health care and lost productivity, according to federal estimates. Additionally, according to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, tobacco use is responsible for "an estimated $96.8 billion per year in lost productivity due to sickness and premature death."
While there is irrefutable proof that smoking has ill effects for individual employee health, opponents of the ban argue that these kinds of policies are an extremely slippery slope that could open a Pandora’s Box for other kinds of hiring discrimination, where employees could be fired or banned for personal decisions made during their free time. Michael Siegel, MD, professor of community health at the Boston University School of Public Health has stated: "The first thing is that not hiring smokers is employment discrimination. People who support these policies are basically saying that they are OK with employment discrimination under certain circumstances. You quickly realize how dangerous that is."
Either way you slice it; smoking bans are causing quite a stir in the medical world. Where do you stand on the issue?
