Airlines hiring smokers???

[zugzug]

And after we get rid of all the smokers

It's the fat people we go after next. Then you have to be able to pat your head and rub your tummy. Pretty soon it will get out of hand. If the health insurance companies had their way... They would quit writing coverage for hurricanes for the coastal states and say.... Well you chose to live there and....How about we only hire people with no known family history of any diseases. DNA test is next. Also, if you do something stupid on your time off you can be fired... Since when do we get paid or represent the company 24/7?

Carrying a few extra pounds anyone?

 

[erj-145mech]

I don't care about Alaska. They are fully within their right, IMO, to hire only bioengineered chimps if they want. I'm simply of the opinion that their focus on nicotine detection is unfair and misguided.

Once again, nicotine is not the issue, the issue is tobacco use.

What company are you directing this to? Do you need a nicotine fix now? Will this needless rant cease if you get a fix now? Why are you directing your rant at this board? Do you think that your rant here will have any effect on the issue at hand?

Sorry, the smoking area is on the other side of security...maybe they'll listen to you.

 

[Gorilla]

Reread the thread. I'll say it again, ad nauseum... Alaska, or anyone else, IMO, is within their rights to test for nicotine, caffeine, chocolate syrup, whatever they want. I can apply or not apply. All I'm saying is that I think the scrutiny is misguided.

They strongly imply that by testing for nicotine, they are eliminating wicked smokers from their ranks. Not all nicotine comes from cigarettes. Further, I believe the focus should more appropriately be applied to alcohol abuse.

That's it. It's not that tough.

You seem to have a real beef with nicotine. Do you harass a guy drinking a Guiness with the same vehemence? Notice I said nicotine, not cigarettes.

 

[soonerpilot625]

hello people! how soon do you guys forget what smoking does to your eye sight!!! i have been smoking for two years now and at night(at altitude) it is pretty bad. i can't see nearly as well now that i smoke. sure the aircraft is pressurized but you still get the effects of altitude to a certain extent. what is it like 6,000ft cabin pressure... not to mention doing a 4 hour flight and all you can think of is getting off the plane to smoke your cig! i will have to quite the cancer sticks before the majors... can't light up in their cabin! plus it smells like *#^*. personally i think it is pretty clear why they don't want to hire smokers. but that's just my opinion i could be wrong...

 

[CandlerWun]

Excellent points above. I smoked off-and-on in college and the thing that motivated me to give it up (besides the fact that it stopped being any fun) was that I noticed significant effects on my eyesight, even at sea level. I tended to see spots and have trouble focusing, plus all the smoke dried out and irritated my contact-lens-wearing eyes. Once I stopped doing it regularly, those issues disappeared.

A related point is that an employee who is addicted to a substance that must be consumed every few hours, and that is administered via a medium that is offensive and/or destructive (e.g., smoke or "chaw"), will have significantly lower productivity than the same employee without the addiction. Not necessarily massively lower productivity, but significantly lower.

Josh M.

 

[Sctt@NJA]

I wish someone would sue Alaska airlines. The idea of a company dictating employees behavior off the job is repugnant to me.

Health care costs and sick days? How about a statistical analysis showing that skiers and rock climbers are likely to break bones and miss work. Can a company insist employees not take a ski vacation?

How about red meat and junk food. Can a company regulate your diet?

How about the car you drive? Little red sports cars have higher insurance rates so surely an employee that drives one is more likely to get in an accident and miss work. Can your employeer tell you what kind of cars you can drive?

Since when does anyone have to submit to any kind of test for anything other than illegal substances when that employee has a safety senstive function? (Mandated by federal law)

Enough is enough and I think everyone should be pissed about this stuff.

 

[erj-145mech]

I wish someone would sue Alaska airlines. .

Under what grounds? Its a condition of employment. You agree to it when you apply for a position. Its a private corporation, and they may hire whom ever they wish to.

Good luck on finding an attorney, there's no money in it for them.

 

[Sctt@NJA]

No grounds?

Little history. Once upon a time there were company towns. The streets the houses and businesses were all owned by a single company that ran maybe a factory or coal mine there.

You would think with all the citizens of this town being company employees living on company property that the company could make any rules they like, right? Wrong.

One example is free political speech, like the ability to put up a sign on your front lawn endorsing a political candidate. Since the company owns your lawn as well as your house the company might think they have the right to tell you who you can or cannot endorse with a sign. Wrong again.

Laws were created to protect the employees from a company that might try to control every aspect of an employees life.

The idea that a company can set any rules they like is juvenile. If tomorrow your company made a new policy that to keep your job you had to submit to having video cameras installed in your house so they could monitor your behavior... you don't think there is a lawsuit there if you got fired for refusing??

Employers actually have a responsiblity to act within a social standard. Our laws reflect this. Some company policies, like the Alaska no-smoking policy, are on untested grounds and will only be allowed if we, as a society don't stand up and say NO.

 

[erj-145mech]

Bubba, if you really feel that strong about this issue, then by all means take the bull by the horns and go for it. Keep us informed, because you can be dismissed for failing to comply with company published policies. Thats been upheld by higher courts.

I'm eagerly awaiting the results.

 

[Sctt@NJA]

Just an amazing attitude to me. "Must obey company procedures... whatever they may be"

You would be a fun employee. I would say "pick your nose and eat it or you are fired"

That would be pretty funny to see you believe such a thing to be within my power because I am your almighty employer.

 

[erj-145mech]

Just an amazing attitude to me. "Must obey company procedures... whatever they may be"
.

You must be a real joy to be in the cockpit with on a four day trip, listening to you b!tch, p!ss and moan about every little company rule and regulation that you don't agree with. If a policy is known before the hiring begins, and you don't agree with it, then don't work there, its that simple. There are 17 states that don't have laws about dismissing employees for personal habits away from the workplace.

When you become Czar of the Universe, then you can change that.

Life's too short to let piddly stuff to get your blood pressure up.

 

[Donsa320]

An example of what nicotine addiction can do. F/O's tell me of captains that intentionally taxi slow and give way to other outbounds so that they will have time to smoke 2 cigarettes on the taxi out. The procedure on the DC-9/B-717 is to crack a side window open and manually close the outflow valve so that all the air going out of the side window will drag their cigarette smoke with it. Thus the Flight Attendants won't smell it in the galley. Apparantly the F/A's have more 'nads then the F/O's and will more likely turn them in. The F/O's just put up with the second hand smoke. Pathetic!

DC

 

[Sctt@NJA]

You guys understand that this issue isn't about smoking on the job right? If you like to smoke a cigar with brandy twice a year the Alaska policy says "Give it up or lose your job."

I don't complain about all the company rules I don't agree with. (not more than anyone else anyhow) But this is different.

The "obey or don't work there" argument is worthy of a five year old mind. I am sorry if I sound tedious, but I feel the same way about you.

 

[erj-145mech]

You guys understand that this issue isn't about smoking on the job right? .

Yes we understand that, you seem to have a problem with that. You have a choice, if you choose to use nicotine products, you have chosen not to fly for Alaska Airlines. Do you understand that? Its not rocket science, you're not re-inventing the wheel.

Here's a link to the application, if you don't or can't meet the minimums set forth, don't apply.

https://alaskaairlines.recruitmax.com/ENG/candidates/default.cfm?szCategory=jobprofile&szOrderID=2121&szCandidateID=0&szSearchWords=&szReturnToSearch=1

And if feel that this is unjustified, contact the "Texas Hammer", here:

http://www.jimadler.com/

If IBM offered you a left seat in a brand new G550 for $250k/yr, provided that you abstain from nicotine products, would you whore yourself out for that?

 

[Sctt@NJA]

Oh I have no interest in Alaska. I honestly wouldn't work for a place that thinks they own people.

The CEO of my company happens to be a smoker, so I don't think this particular issue is going to come up where I work.

Interesting that you can only say the same thing over and over without ever responding to some of the hypotheticals I presented earlier.