Only Non-Smokers Need Apply At Baylor

DALLAS (CBS 11 NEWS) – Currently there are some 14 million jobless Americans. And if you’re one of the thousands of North Texans looking for work, the competition is tough.

Now, a new hiring limitation by one employer could make the job search even harder.

The Baylor Health Care System has decided that if you use tobacco, in any form, you won’t get a job with them.

“I don’t like it,” said Cassie Grooms. “I don’t think it’s fair.”

Smokers like Grooms were quick to condemn Baylor’s new policy that basically conveys: if you use nicotine, there’s no need to apply.

“We all have the right to smoke a cigarette,” Grooms said in disagreement. “I can understand not [smoking] on their property, but to not hire somebody for smoking…”

Baylor officials claim smoking has a lot to do with the high cost of health care. The FDA estimates smoking costs American employers some $200 billion a year in lost productivity and increased medical costs.

“It’s about how we continue to deal with the rising health care costs,” said Baylor CEO Joel Allison. “It’s about how do we really focus on the new model of health care around prevention and well, and how do we keep people healthy. And I think that’s very, very important for us as a city, a state and a nation.”

Smoking was banned at all Baylor campuses four years ago. But, can they legally refuse to hire smokers?

“Absolutely they can,” said Dallas employment attorney Thomas Brandt. “People think well, that’s discriminatory, but really there are only certain factors that you cannot consider when making hiring decisions.”

Things like race, gender, ethnicity or national origin cannot be considered when hiring an employee.

If increased medical costs are a consideration for banning employee tobacco use, then ponder this: obesity is also a national health crisis. According to the CDC obesity costs employers some $147 billion a year.


One Comment

  1. ol coot says:

    i guess i wont be going there for my medical needs anymore ….

    1. Zazou Burson says:

      Oh be quiet all or you and eat your peas!

    2. harry balz says:

      HIV is pretty expensive to treat. No Gays please.

      1. lost bozo says:

        Right on! Let em rot! and anybody else who’s basically done themselves in, smokers, gays, druggies, fatties, anorectics, couch potatoes, wounded gang bangers, bikers who don’t wear helmets, adrenalin addicts who get hurt, skate boarders, people who don’t wear seat belts, people who talk on cell phones or text while they drive…wait I just put myslef in the mix…arrrgghhh

      2. Freeland Dave says:

        So is breast cancer so apparently we shouldn’t hire women. And if you go to that extreme why not extend it to men for prostate cancer. Anyone with a prostate need not apply..

        Oh but it can be even dumber than that. Like that tanning booth? They shouldn’t hire you because they can cause skin cancer. How about the suspected cancers caused by cellular telephones. No cell phone usage, EVER!

        It can go on and on so where do we want to stop?

        And if we do it purely on financial reasons, more people die in car accidents than cancer so I suppose if you own or ride in a car they shouldn’t hire you either.

        It’s nothing more that political correctness going out of control as they align with the plans of Obama care and news flash, Baylor is not the only place doing such things.

        True, they don’t owe anyone a job but then too no one is required to give them their business either. In short, if you don’t like what they are doing you can take your business elsewhere and seek employment elsewhere. If this causes Baylor loss of revenue they will change their minds. It’s not about health and welfare of people, it’s all about money.

        Oh BTW, I don’t smoke and I don’t drink.

      3. Mike Notsaying says:

        attention all employees we are no longer hiring these groups due to health concerns: obese, smokers, drinkers, pot users, the elderly , the young, the un vaccinated, the gay for fear of std, women because they have less blood than men which means less white blood cells, anyone against the establishment in any way {we will cross reference your Facebook etc, people with asthma, people with immunodeficiency’s, cancer patients , nursing or pregnant mothers … so any slaves left that want to apply give a dna sample blood test urine test submit for rectal exam and additional vaccines to get your application

        FuC U TyRaNtS i hope you enjoy the hell you are partisipating in creating BOYCOTT THIS COMPANY!!!!!!! VOTE WITH YOUR MONEY

      4. Mary says:

        I guess Obama won’t be applying for a job.

      5. johnboy says:

        Harry, I totally agree with you, but watch your step as it’s racist to talk about gays, but lock out smokers. I wonder if this outfit knows how much money is spent on the wonderful gays and their Evil HIV? Now O’Dumbo has even ruined the Military.

      6. dabu says:

        It’s a slippery slope. What wont they deny?

        Overweight, no job!
        Drink alcohol, no job!
        Don’t eat a low fat diet, no job!
        Don’t walk 20 miles a week, no job!
        Eat donuts on Sunday, no job!
        Ride a motorcycle, no job!

        Obviously this isn’t legal, but who cares all lawyers are impotent in a court of law anyway!

      7. katok says:

        No Fatties who might get diabetes, no Pregos who want 6 weeks paid vacation, no parking lot because cars cause pollution which cause cancer. Discriminate agianst all or you are just being discriminatory

      8. Mike Notsaying says:

        know what our grandfathers did to tyrants? they left them dead on normandy beach

      9. fitbrmom says:

        You don’t have to be gay to contract HIV or an STD. I keep seeing people posting here in reference to gays on that topic. About 1/4 of our adult HETERO population is walking around with some form of an STD, and that just counts the ones who KNOW they have it. Just sayin’.

    3. A. Levy says:

      Do they also target people who drink alcohol, use drugs, eat “the wrong” foods, etc.? This is not a medical decision, it’s a politically-motivated one. If you don’t comply with the “laws” of political correctness, you can work for them.

      Well, here’s a word for those people in Texas who believe they’re still in a free country. BOYCOTT!!

      1. Jack Russell says:

        Lame, A. Levy. Baylor didn’t say this was a medical decision. Its a FINANCIAL decision. Baylor is a BUSINESS. Businesses get to make financial decisions. They don’t OWE anyone a job and if they decide that they want to hire obese alcoholics but not smokers, that’s THEIR CHOICE IN WHATS LEFT OF A FREE SOCIETY. Political correctness has nothing to do with deciding a particular behavior causes employees to cost more than you want to provide in benefits. Why don’t you THINK THINGS THROUGH before you show your ignorance?

      2. zorkli1c says:

        Agree. Alcohol costs society more than smoking does when you consider the crime it causes along with the other social and medical problems. But alcohol is socially acceptable–almost required–so costs be damned.

      3. Watson says:

        People don’t take Drinking breaks and they don’t pour their second hand booze down someones throats.

      4. hiway280z says:

        and who says a person that does not smoke is healthy ? I know many who smoke, rarely miss work and are healthy. If that is their motive who else should they not hire ? drunks, drug addicts, people who don’t eat the Michelle Obama menu, eat sugar, take risks in sports or just crossing a street, bad drivers.It is political. fine pay smokers disability and let em stay home and enjoy life while your workers pay them. Have you seen the new stupid ad ? a baby carriage outsidewith smoke around it and the baby choaking, in an elevator alone chocking any where they show it the poor baby is choaking as the cloud of smoke out side goesin the carriage. LOL

      5. kettlecorn says:

        I’m betting that for everyone who boycotts this company, there will be another that starts using them just for the fact that they won’t have some nurse or other health care worker working on then that smells like they just came out of some smokey bar smelling like an ashtray.

      6. Jack says:

        They have removed the toilets at Baylor because eliminating toxic waste from one’s body exposes others to second hand s___t and all that.

      7. gobnait says:

        @Watson: and yet if an alcoholic manages to get himself hired and then goes on a binge, he can’t be fired because he’s classified as ‘disabled’ and entitled to treatment at his boss’ expense.

      8. D. Osburn says:

        Smoking is a choice. It was not stated that they could not perform their job duties, but that collectivly, smoking costs billions more in health costs than non smokers. Maybe they hire the smokers, adjust what their out of pocket monthly cost will be to be covered it the Baylor health care plan. Discrimination? No, prudent business practice.

      9. MichaeL Locke says:

        Boycott them? Right, they are the LARGEST , heathcare system in Texas dedicated to Heart & vascular health. They have over 16,000 employees & over 27 different hospitals . Grow up people the world is changing. You can drive a green car use non incanedscent lightbulbs. Demand the GOVERNMENT be your everything, & then smoke . get sick & DEMAND the very hospital you want to boycott have their employees be smoke free.

    4. Dale C Scott says:

      Hey, Baylor —– GOOD FOR YOU ! Far too many think that they can do whatever they please without consequences. Sure, the lady has a right to smoke. You have a right not to hire someone who is a greater risk of having health problems. More institutions should consider potential “at risk” individuals when hiring. It may be unpopular with many, but alcohol use and obesity may well be considereations added to the job interview process in the immediate future. Legislated better health. A new frontier in our society.

      1. hiway280z says:

        marxist control of the people..ah should they not hire gays as they have a highrisk of aids. Maybe part of the physical before hiring should be check all relatives to see if there is cancer in the family history.

      2. Dee Smith says:

        there is nothing new under the sun. Ecc. 1:9 If you think that this concept is new, you are sadly mistaken. And to legislate “better health” is a micron away from slavery.

      3. Mary says:

        If tobacco was really bad for humans, the federal government would out-law growing it.

      4. rangerrebew says:

        I don’t think they should hire anyone who drives a car as they MAY be killed in an accident. The truth is none of us comes out of this life alive; we have a 100 percent mortality rate. Given the mortality rate for smokers is exactly the same as nonsmokers this sounds like liberal profiling or discrimination based on life style. Personally, I’m not a smoker and don’t care if people want to speed their demise. But business and government have no business in this area.

      5. ewrte says:

        nope – you can’t let the gov. tell you who you can hire or who you can rent to if you’re going to let them restrict you in any way. She doesn’t have a right to smoke but the gov. doesn’t have a right to tell you you have to hire her either.

        While you’re at it look nto Susan B Khomen and soem of these other “women’s” cancer organizations and see hwo much of their money they give directly to Planned Parenthood! Follow the money! Did you think when you were giving your buck to curign cancer part fo ti was goig n tot he organization that champions aborting babies? Gee why does it have ot be women’s cancer? More men die of prostate cancer – how aboyut we just attack cancer (another thing like alternatives to oil that unfortunately is too lucrative to ever actually solve but it makes for great limp wristed milktoast Lefty Dem speeches)

    5. sueinmi says:

      Good luck going anywhere else as well. Medicare/Medicaid has said that reimbursement will be refused to hospitals that do not comply with non-smoking on property facilities (most of their clients have M/M). We’ve been told here in MI that even if our clothes smell like smoke there may be diciplinary action. I’m not a smoker but this is clearly the over reach of the federal government. Carrots are dangled with the understanding that it’s going to be done their way regardless of individual freedom and rights. Welcome to Obamacare!

    6. hiway280z says:

      Obama won’t get hired there. He smokes and Michelle said he quit but some in the white house said he still smokes. So when we throw him out in 2012 he may as well not go there for a job. LOL Oh he wouldn’t anyway we will be supporting him the rest of his life and he has never worked a real job in his life.

    7. teai is stronger says:


      AIDS is very expensive to treat illness with rising health care costs means Gays should not be hired. Lets go to POT smokers.

    8. Rio Sam says:

      Well, I guess that means when Obama gets put out of a job in 2012 he won’t be able to apply to this company for a job…LOL LOL LOL

    9. david says:

      Our company started doing this over 20 years ago. We helped people quit and it was a great envirnoment.

      1. jhf says:

        to quote the first bi tch “all that for a flag”

    10. mark says:

      Non-smokers are actually more costly to our healthcare system according to new study, more here:

    11. Freedom 1st says:

      You’ll go where obama tells you to go.

    12. Freedom 1st says:

      You’ll go where obama tells you to go!

    13. Doris Carman says:

      Make sense. If it is your company you should be able to only hire who you want. If only presidents could not smoke we wouldnt have this creep in office,

    14. Doris Carman says:

      Good thing there are other hospitalsfor you. Aside from the health insurance aspect, people dont realize how offensive the odor from smokers is.

    15. Walter LeCroy says:

      Smoking kils 400k smokers and 40k non-smokers per hear. Insurance companes know that nicotine addicts are impaired drivers. Irresponsible people should not be hired; that includes the obese.

  2. mike says:

    I wont be going to baylor! Whats next? Not hiring those that drink soda or take other unhealthy food/drink choices? I will die before I use baylor for anything.

    1. Toby says:

      I guess this means dope smokers too…

    2. Sharon says:

      That will be next…wait and see.

    3. NWH says:

      good deal. Mike’s down. That’s 1. So is ol coot above…that’s 2. Just a few hundred more and Baylor’s golden.

    4. Andrew says:

      They have right not to hire. You have right not to use their product.

      1. sfdgfdg says:

        exactly – but the Left is afraid no one will support them in their retar ded schemes so they legislate it. That’s also whyt he Left fights th efree market so much – if they dont; get their shythooks into it and corrupt it and it works then no one will have any use for them. If they stimy it then they can point ta it and say see it doesn’t work let’s irrationally cause even more damage regulations… It’ll end eventually because they can only choke the goose so long…

  3. Jucky says:

    They have the right to limit who they hire, but if they are going to say that it is because of insurance issues, they need to not hire fat people either!

    1. steamdwarf says:

      good point and probably next in line to cut health costs – just the beginning of fallout from obamacare monstrosity that pelosi said didn’t need to be read by anyone

      1. Dwarftosser says:

        Yeah, right. Health care costs have risen faster than inflation for at least the last 10-12 years, and you want to blame Obama? Does he have a time machine in this fantasy-land that you live in?

    2. tayloralexander says:

      their choice not yours

    3. mary says:

      Personally, the extreme, anti-smoking activist’s obnoxious behavior makes me sick. Let’s not hire control freaks like them , and we’ll all breath easier.

      1. Dave says:

        Mary, I am tired of breathiung the cigarette smoke of others when I go out in public. Smokers who congregate around the entry or exit of any building force you to walk through their noxious cloud, to get in or out. Outdoor events are also a big one. Just because the event is outside, why do think you can smoke around people? Smoking in public is not a right, as so many seem to think.

      2. dankajell says:


        That’s a pretty lame ass comment!! The states I have worked and lived in have “no smoking in front of entrances laws” They varied in the amount of feet between each state also, I can’t speak for every state out there, Also not every smoker is an inconsiderate a$$hole. I personally stand out in the middle of the parking lot or make it a point to get away from everyone that doesn’t smoke because I don’t need to hear any whining. But then again I’ll always have the self righteous jerk that feels the need to purposely walk by me and cough or wave there hand in the air and give me a dirty look. I’m sick of those people and you sound like one also!!!

    4. Its My Company says:

      In my company we don’t hire either. Fat people don’t have the energy to work for me and smokers are addicts and can’t follow the no-smoking at the job rule we tried to impose.

      1. Dewey says:

        And those that don’t agree can boycot your business.

      2. SMOKER says:


      3. SMOKER says:


      4. Dave says:

        You do not own the oxygen or air that people share to breathe. Your argument is like saying if you were to have a river run through your backyard, it is your right to dump toxic waste into it. Just because the river runs through your property, you do not have the right to polute it. It is a shared resource…

      5. Danielle says:

        Dave, quit driving your car, it is causing me to cough. It is poluting the air much worse than my cigarette.

      6. Dikauff says:

        SMOKER, then you will have no problem with giving me your name and address sot that I can sue you for assault when I get an asthma attack from being around you. You may have the right to destroy your life…you DO NOT have the right to destroy mine.

      7. Beez says:

        Yeah, like anyone would give out their name and address to an obvious stalker.

      8. Its My Company says:


      9. Baylor Butteheads says:

        In my company we don’t hire morons.

        Since that seems to be your slippery slope, I’d watch out.

      10. Jo says:

        Smoker –
        I am the child of smokers. Both dead early from health problems caused from smoking. You are talking garbage – I worked with smokers at the Red Cross – they took more smoking breaks than the average worker & if you weren’t a smoker the Supervisor was likely to forget that you were even entitled to a break.They took more time off than we non-smokers – with coughs & colds, too. My brother died last year – 50 y/o, dropped dead during an Asthma attack in the hospital parking lot, Smoker – he was told to quit, but couldn’t.
        My Fil is 85 he has been dying now for 6 years – 2 pack a day smoker. I’d love to know how much he has cost the NH taxpayers over the last 10 years, millions – I think. My MiL is the same age & very healthy for her age, non- smoker – but he will be the death of her. Dankajell – not every smoker is an inconsiderate jerk – just 99% & they do still smoke outside the entries to buiildings – regardless of laws.
        I went to buy a chicken BBQ dinner at a fundraiser last weekend & some guy was serving my food with a cigarette, wit hanging out the side of his mouth, with a half inch of ash hanging off it.

    5. hiway280z says:

      or those to skinny

    6. Spanky says:

      And they need to not hire skinny people, because BOTH fat and skinny people have higher health care costs than average weight people!

    7. dgh says:

      what an 1diot they have a rigth ot hire who they want but you want to force them to do it your way – what an arsewipe – let me guess hypcoritical liberal dou chebag

  4. Clay says:

    Really–How about saying we won’t hire anyone who drinks alcohol or drugs in the medical profession- so many medical personnel are the worst offenders of drinking way to much or do drugs…which would you rather have? A hung over doctor doing surgery or someone who smoked a cigarette doing surgery-hmmm

    1. Meri says:

      Alcohol IS a drug, dear. And tobacco is the worst drug of all. Incidentally, do YOU smoke?

      1. Shaman30 says:

        Please explain how tobacco is “the worst drug of all”. What criterion are you using to make that claim?

      2. bitterclinger99 says:

        alcohol kills more people than all illicit drugs combined every single year. Please do some research you self-righteous boob.

      3. M says:

        Actually… tobacco is not the worst drug. I have never seen a high school drivers ed class car with students and a teacher in it destroyed by smoking… but I did see one destroyed by a drunk driver… All the students and the teacher died… ofc the drunks didn’t.

        Tobacco kills you… Drinking kills others. I’d rather have a doctor cut me open with a smoke in his mouth than one that was just drinking… that way when he’s done I can borrow his smoke. I’ll need it after surgery anyhow.

      4. Kevin Pearson says:

        It has nothing to do with drugs. Anyone that uses tobacco, demonstrates such poor judgment that they would not be useful as employees in the first place.

        Freshman level Chemistry.

        Carbon monoxide bonds with hemoglobin causing the hemoglobin to be incapable of carrying oxygen to the cells in the body to produce energy, even in environments with plenty of fresh air and oxygen.
        These oxygen-deprived cells include the brain cells.
        Thus the brain cells are incapable to convert food to energy and so cannot function properly
        ALL smoke, including cigarette smoke contains at least small quantities of carbon monoxide.
        So smoking a cigarette deprives your brain of oxygen causing you to be unable to think properly causing you to do stupid things, such as smoke another cigarette and vote Democrat.

      5. Brad says:

        Kevin Pearson:

        I’m not even going to ask if you work in the medical field. I smoke (although I’m in the process of quitting, I’m a Republican, I have bachelor’s degrees in finance and accounting, an MBA, and am a CPA at one of the Big 4. Gee, I guess all of that smoking has stunted my ability to make intelligent choices decisions, or in the way you portray it, I have made (and do make) stupid decisions. Based on your logic, I could be a theoretical physicist or a neurosurgeon if I hadn’t started smoking. I take it you’re a non-smoker and that’s fine, but don’t use medical logic to feel superior to them. I know plenty of intelligent people (doctors, lawyers, university professors, research economists, do I need to keep going?) who smoke. I’ll tell you what substance leads to bad decisions: alcohol.

        I’m not proud that I smoke, but I do, and it’s quite insulting that you take an entire demographic and generalize them as being (and I’m paraphrasing here) stupid. It insults me and, more importantly, it insults anyone else who’s ever smoked, including people more intelligent than you or I. Thank you, have a wonderful day

      6. Mary says:

        I must be dead because I was raised in a house with both parents smoking like chimneys.

      7. Kevin Pearson says:

        Brad, I don’t consider a CPA productive. CPA’s don’t produce anything, all they do is skim a little off the top of people that do. Accountants are the reason that we cannot get a flat tax or get rid of the IRS because then the accountants would lose their livelihoods and they would have to get real jobs where they would actually have to do something constructive other than just piles and piles of paper to justify your existence and salaries.

        As a holder of two engineering degrees and an MBA myself, I see calculus as a freshman level course, and as far as I am concerned, anyone that cannot handle freshman level calculus has no business being in college in the first place. That’s why we have so many liberals in this world because too many think that they are “educated” when they cannot even handle the basics.

        Go to any college that doesn’t specialize in liberal art degrees and you will find that the only students that you see smoking on campus are foreign students from former Communist countries that have cradle to grave health care. Cigarettes are a gateway drug to socialize medicine.

        Forget the hammer and sickle. The international symbol of Communism should be the cigarette.

    2. Zig Sulewski says:

      In responce to Kevin Pearson,—What about the smoke from the wildfires in Texas, the carbon monoxide and other emmisions ifrom vehicles, the polluted air we breath from nature’s environs and the emmisions from coal, desiel, wood, and whatever polutants come from nuclear energy causing allergies that must cost companies billions in lost time and labor????
      Boycott these arragant companies. — There’s probably a woman behind these stupid rules and regulations.

      1. old goat says:

        You certainly have the right to boycott them and they have the right to do what they can to hold down costs and keep stinky people from offending their patients.

        I understand older people who started smoking before they knew it was murderous to all around them, but anybody under age 55 who smokes is making a downright stupid choice. Do you seriously think only women dislike smoking?

      2. Kevin Pearson says:

        People don’t stick the exhaust pipes and the smokestacks in their faces and inhale the smoke as they do cigarettes. They are deliberately designed to be adequately ventilated and people that have to work near them where masks to protect themselves. Smokers on the other hand, keep right at it.

        Cigarettes are a gateway drug to socialized medicine.

    3. SMOKER says:


      1. Spallink Nodsie says:

        Is your caps lock key broken?

      2. smoker says:

        SPALLINK NODSIE…..i was just hoping some one would notice….BUT OF COURSE YOU NOTICED THE ALL CAPS …NOT THE ISSUE ABOUT RIGHTS,TRUTH,LIBERTY ,IE ESPECIALLY PERSONAL LIBERTY….gosh…maybe if i write in lowercase you might see…….personal liberty,at stake,read the comments focus on subject…..which apparently some people think is actually baylor’s concern for our health…lol……who really believes that……its is about unjust bans on a legal,taxed product….why does the government allow baylor to not hire smokers……yet i can not smoke in my own privately owned business…do i not get the same rights as baylor?????????????maybe i smoke to much.because i learned on this page today from our progressive friends that smokers are lowgrades…ie dumb…ie not smart…so i must have smoked one to many legal not know if my caps were locked…or ..i have some kind of carbon monoxide imbalnce…here comes a politically incorrect statement..i was auctually typing loudly…because loosing freedoms,discrimination,and blatant lies makes my caps stick….but gee i wouln’t know cause i am so dumb from smoking……you read all the comments.????..sheeple….does you l key stick?????

      3. dam says:

        Rant much?

      4. Kevin Pearson says:

        I need a sign for my front door that reads

        Firearms welcome.
        Tobacco products NOT

      5. Xavier says:

        DUDE — maybe switch to decaf??

  5. Clay says:

    Correction: which would you rather have? A hung over doctor doing surgery or someone who smoked a cigarette before surgery-hmmm

    1. C Bauer says:


    2. Joseph Blow says:

      Nice false choice.

      1. Stavros36 says:

        Not false at all. If employers can discriminate based on personal habits, then they should stop hiring drinkers. Alcohol is a very big contributor to health care costs. Nah, too many doctors, and administrators like their drinks after work. Now smokers they’re REAL villians.

      2. dgh says:

        you picked up on that typical liberal drivel “either we send millions of dollars of food to rot on the loading docks in Africa or you want kids to starve to death”

        IT’s the same false logic that allows Reid to say we are declaring any Republican bills dead on arrival wihtout reading them and then say the Republicans are stone walling. There’s apparentyl enough ret@rded mooches and lefty’s that can’t think for themsleves…

    3. tayloralexander says:


    4. M says:

      Smoker I explained why just above.

      1. SMOKER says:

        M….explained what??????I have low o2/or is low co2/or low po2/…explained what????my eyesight must be going because i smoke

    5. Jay P says:

      Really? All people that drink do so to the point that they get hung over? Your argument is invalid.

    6. Xavier says:

      Um, yeah. Because it’s one or the other!!

  6. Suzy says:

    Seems to me they’d have to have access to private information to ensure their employees aren’t truly smoking. Either that or randomly testing all their employees for nicotine in their system. Let’s face it, the job market being what it is and people being desperate for jobs, many if not most smokers who needs jobs will lie about their nicotine use. And former smokers currently working at Baylor may fall off the wagon and Baylor would need to fire them should their relapse become know. So, get ready for your employer to have access to all your medical information or random nicotine testing. Oh, and yes, food intake monitoring and exercise minimums will be enforced next since “controlling medical costs” is so much important than a person’s privacy and freedom to make currently legal choices about lifestyle and behavior.

    1. tayloralexander says:

      News Flash………… there is a urine test thatidentifies over 90 items that an employer may use to deny a position that belongs to the employer. NOT the NOT THE APPLICANT

      1. Skinny says:

        And 99% of those substances are not tested. IT costs MONEY to do that. I hope you don’t drink coffee, or eat poppyseed bagels, or use Scope mouthwash..

      2. M. Walton says:

        It’s interesting how you say things like your the only smart person in the room however it seems that you are pretty unintelligent with how you have to say News Flash…. and capitalize things like people can’t figure out the point of your argument.

        At my job you can choose to pay a smoking or non-smoking rate. I pay the smoking rate. I was non-smoking and quit when the split happened but I only quit for 3 months… mainly because I love to smoke. So I pay the higher price and that’s fine with me.

        Go away troll.

      3. teaj says:

        news flash …………………………………………………………………………………. …………………………………………………………………………………………. um nm

  7. Suzy says:

    Oh, and I thought that it was only government entities I had to worry about invading my privacy and monitoring and attempting to control my behavior. Apparently corporate America is just as interested in asserting power over the little people in an attempt to control behavior. Power corrupts, especially when money is involved.

    1. J says:

      Funny you should mention that, and you know what its funny because alot of us know what really going on. And people think that GI JOE was just a show, the phrase knowing is half the battle is absolutely correct. The governement, and corporate america controlling your action is the tip of the ice berg. The changes are already here, and they will keep coming. Until we are dead.

  8. J says:

    So let me get this straight. Baylor doesn’t want to hire anyone who smokes because its the smokers fault for using tobacco which caused lots of health problems. So now its the our fault that “they” gave us cigarettes to smoke, made money off of us and killed us at the same time. Then a huge company wants to not give us jobs for this. To top it off its a Medical Facility!! For one we probably didn’t know the gravity of the situation when we first started smoking, same as fast food restaurants. You want us to kill ourselves so we come to you for help, only so you can over charge and deprive of us what we need to live so you can live longer and more wealthy. I am so sick and tired of the big boys leading us to our deaths while keeping us in the dark about what matters. We are not only losing our rights, but our health and there is nothing they are going to do to help until we are all DEAD!!

    Sorry for the rant but its happening all around us, slowly we are deteriorating while they make more money. We lose jobs while they buy a fancy new car. We are losing our homes when they buy a new condo to satisfy their sick endeavors. What do they say when we ask for help, its your fault you’re in this situation. That is wrong, we are not here to fend for ourselves and leave another to rot but to help one another, and that is very reason why we will fall. The very meaning of the phrase the richer get richer etc is teaching to blame the victims, its not fat black womans fault shes fat, alot of time they’re racist batsards that wont give her job, so all she can afford with the type of money she gets is fast food. Our way of life is disgusting, stop be a product of your environment. Let the environment reflect your actions.

    1. k says:

      ” The very meaning of the phrase the richer get richer etc is teaching to blame the victims, its not fat black womans fault shes fat, alot of time they’re racist batsards that wont give her job, so all she can afford with the type of money she gets is fast food.”

      Yea. What did people eat before Burger King?

      1. Kevin Pearson says:

        Last I checked Fast food wasn’t all that cheap. You get a much better value at the Deli in WalMart.

    2. walljasper says:

      If you want people to read your post, drop the way-overused and insipid “”So let me get this straight.”

      Though you might think it conveys your a sense of incredulity, indignation or that only an idiot won;t see it any other way than yours

      but it does;t work. It negates what you have to say. And that is too bad, as I think you might have a point. Just help us get a chance to read that point, without the preface, ok?

      Good luck.


    3. Kevin Pearson says:

      Baylor is a private institution. Baptist actually. Trust me Baylor didn’t collect any taxes from you.

      1. bill says:

        Bull, all hospitals public or private get federal subsidies from taxpayers all over the country.

    4. Dont Whine says:

      Poor you! Sorry you were too stupid to figure out what thinking people know. Smoking is bad. You seriously grew up not knowing that?

      And Baylor didn’t “give” anyone cigarettes. You might be one of those losers that never went out and made anything of yourself and now blame your problems on those who did. Corporations started out as small businesses created by one or two people with an idea and hard work. How awful for you that they succeeded and grew and now employ hundreds of people in some cases. Maybe it would have been better if they just kept their business ideas to themselves and never did anything except work for someone else.

      There’s probably no way you will ever understand this, since you never started a successful company or kicked a bad habit. But do yourself a favor. Stop smoking. Eat cheap foods (like canned tuna or green vegetables) but drop the starchy carbs. You’ll lose weight and be healthy in 4 months time. While you do that, think of something you could do to make money without working for someone else. Something you are OK at and like to do. Then do it. Start small but think constantly of how you could do more, with the goal of replacing your day job.

      It makes no difference if you’re black or female or anything else. Think only of success. You can do it. I did and you’re probably much smarter than me.

  9. C Bauer says:

    Anybody else notice that stock photo for this story (on the home page) is of Colin Farrell?

  10. Ronnie Scott says:

    Maybe the wise folks at Baylor finally learned that the 12% of Americans who still smoke suffer the mental illness and brain damaged caused by tobacco addiction.

    Like any other business which has stopped hiring smokers, they will save millions in health care and have more productive and successful workers.

    1. Shaman30 says:

      Mental illness and brain damaged [sic] caused by tobacco addiction? Please cite some sources.

      1. Joseph Blow says:

        Los Angeles Times, November 22, 2000: “Some studies suggest that certain mental illnesses may be triggered or exacerbated by smoking, perhaps because of its mood-altering potential. For instance, in an article in the Journal of the American Medical Assn. published earlier this month, scientists reported that adolescents and young people who smoked heavily were more likely to develop anxiety disorders later in life.”

      2. Frank Davis says:

        That’s hardly a definitive. Some studies……..might suggest……………hogwash.

      3. Kevin Pearson says:

        Carbon monoxide poisoning … look it up.

    2. Realist says:

      You are surley getting your “info” from either the Government or a comic book my friend. Another one lost I’m afraid. Nothing to see here people. Move on.

      1. utoia says:

        Health pollution bad:( Soul pollution good:)
        It’s in the progressive Bible dontcha know.

        When the Cleveland Clinic did the same thing in 2007 I started smoking! Totalitarian health zealots will be the death of us all!

    3. Larry Waters says:

      If by tobacco addiction you mean nicotine addiction, I guess you missed the the fact that nicotine is now proven to increase cognitive abilities, reduce stress, and lose weight.
      [Web Source: Associated Press (16 September 2011)…-ban-tobacco-1863183%5D

      Cigarettes are not the only source of nicotine and it’s not the nicotine which makes cigarettes harmful; it’s the 5-10K toxic substances created when the cigarette is lit.

      Swedish snus, for example, is 99% less harmful to a smoker than cigarettes. That makes it as dangerous as grilled meat or a cup of French roast coffee.

      The Swedish version of FDA has regulated snus as a food product for over 40 years and removed the requirement for a cancer warning label a few years back…..because Swedish snus has never caused lung, oral, throat, stomach, or lung cancer.

      That doesn’t stop the ideologues and intellectually lazy from lumping all tobacco products; lit and smokeless, into one big politically correct pile.

      Nicotine despite its health benefits is extremely addictive. People who don’t use any tobacco products should not start now.

      Regarding smokers, Swedish/Swedish-style snus is the perfect health and social alternative to cigarettes. It provides enough bio-available nicotine to allow a smoker to quit cigarettes, it’s completely discreet as no spitting is involved, and there is no ‘second hand snus’ to offend others.

      In the end, even cigarettes will never be banned. The Federal, State, and Local governments would collapse within 90 days without punitive tobacco tax revenue. Like most things, this is all about the money.

      Embracing the legally nicotine addicted and helping encourage the use by smokers of working nicotine alternatives to cigarettes is in the best interests of the Public Health.

      1. Larry Waters says:

        Quoted source URL has changed: New one is
        Sorry for the inconvenience.

    4. m says:

      Try 43% use tobacco

  11. Land'oLakes says:

    “We all have the right to smoke a cigarette”
    Huh? There’s no “right” to smoke. Never has been. Never will be.

    Tobacco is addictive, defective and lethal, when USED AS INTENDED. How come we never hear smokers complain about that!

    1. Orkas Eat Seals says:

      Why do you claim there is no right to smoke?
      A person may chose to use tobacco products, alcohol or any other legally available product(s). That choice is their freedom.

    2. Frank Davis says:

      It’s called liberty. I have the right to abuse my body anyway I choose.

      1. Double standard much says:

        And the company has the right to not hire you.

      2. Dont Whine says:

        OK go buy a pound of pot and smoke it. Since you have a right. See how far that argument takes you in court.

      3. SMOKER says:

        YEAH FRANK…..i am glad you get it……LIBERTY

    3. Freedom (noun) says:

      Yes, it is called freedom. And if this is not discrimination; then it should be perfectly acceptable to say that a company should be allowed to site higher than average hypertension and heart disease among blacks as a reason to not hire any.
      How’d you like them apples?
      That is what I thought.

      1. Jack Russell says:

        Stupid comment. Lots of stupid comments on here, but that one is at the top of the heap. Baylor isn’t forced to limit any unhealthy behaviors or groups it doesn’t want to. But, if Baylor sees an economic benefit that justifies not hiring smokers it has every right. Liberal ass idiots that want to limit employers liberties should be escorted to the Land of the Nanny State to live out their days.

    4. Robert Jones says:

      K.. there is no Constitutional Right to smoke, drink, eat or essentially anything other than live in FREEDOM.

      Tobacco is addictive as are many other things. People will continue to use them under their definition of freedom. As long as tobacco and other drugs remain legal, there is little anyone can do to change that.

      1. Flyer says:

        Do any of you read? Ever hear of the Bill Of Rights? Life, Liberty, etc…

        “Liberty is a Right that identifies the condition in which human beings are able to govern themselves, to behave according to their own free will, and take responsibility for their actions.” From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

        Fifth Amendment: “nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.”

        Ninth Amendment: declares that the listing of individual rights in the Constitution and Bill of Rights is not meant to be comprehensive; and that the other rights not specifically mentioned are retained by the people.

      2. Newbern W Johnson says:

        Flyer, just where in the Bill of Rights or the Constitution does it say that you are ENTITLED to a job?

  12. gary says:

    A government-sponsored study recently estimated that medical spending for obesity reached $147 billion in 2008, almost doubling in the past decade. It’s not surprising. About 32 percent of American adults are obese, a condition linked to diabetes, heart disease, even cancer.

    How about smoking? Almost 21 percent of American adults are addicted to cigarettes, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. That’s more than 45 million people. The estimated health care costs pegged to smoking: $96 billion.
    By David S. Martin
    CNN Senior Medical Producer

    1. AlbertG says:

      How many billions of dollars has been raised from the tobacco tax ostensibly to pay for health related issues for smokers? How much of that money has been spent on health care issues for those same people. not much if any.

      The fact is that the government lied about the use of that money. Those tax revenues are being spent on propping up governments all across the country. Not content with spending what is there, states are borrowing against future cigarette tax revenue as guarantees for bond borrowing.

      Next time you see a smoker, thank him or her. They get to pay huge taxes for lots of waste in government while not getting anything in return.
      If it was such a big deal, the money should have built smokers-only hospitals and medical centers. So, take the 96 billion and deduct the taxes already paid by the end users to make your point. There is no equivalent “fat tax” by the government, but it’s early – they just haven’t gotten around to it yet.

      1. Jack Russell says:

        Shut this stupid claptrap up. I don’t thank smokers. I smoked 3 packs a day when I was younger and chose to smoke then and choose not to now because I was intelligent enough to quit. Thank a stupid smoker for smoking? I’m just thankful they don’t have enough sense to avoid paying all those taxes. More power to them. Their choice to smoke makes them easy targets.

  13. gary says:

    Are they already refusing to hire obese folks?
    Do they still sell fried foods, chips, soft drinks, etc?

    Tsk tsk…

    1. NiteNurse says:

      I agree. Most hospitals still sell fried foods, chips, and soft drinks. At least half of their staff can be considered obese. I’m not a smoker myself but if you are going to single them out then you have to consider other bad habits as well.

      1. Jack Russell says:

        No they don’t. Where do these liberal, socialist ideas come from in America? This is a brainless, thoughtless position. Baylor is an employee. Baylor chooses to recruit and maintain a workforce by offering a pay and benefits package. One way to keep their costs down is to limit their employment to non-smokers. If they want to hire 580 lb. skydivers with Tourette Syndrome, that is their prerogative. What possible basis can anyone tell Baylor that they have to limit any legal behavior they don’t want to? Madness!

  14. randyman says:

    How errogant can some people be. This is an insult to all Americans and our freedoms. Nobody has any right to tell anybody what they can or cant do with their personal time. It is like working at a nazi prisoneer camp and you do exactly what the comadont says or else?

    1. Frank Davis says:

      The company that I work for went smoke free on property last year. In response to a question about a smoke free work force they responded that yes, in the future they will be going to a smoke free work force. So much for liberty.

      1. Lary says:

        You have the liberty to go get employment elsewhere. Sorry

    2. NWH says:

      Freedoms? Baylor is a private employer, yes? They have freedoms as well. For example, they have the freedom to hire whomever they damn well please. They cannot discriminate based on race, gender, or national origin. Ok, check. They can, however, hire people who have certain qualifications. They can hire based on work experience, educational background, and…wait for it….health. If they choose not to hire someone because they are unhealthy (in this case, because they’re a smoker), that is WITHIN THEIR RIGHTS. Period. If you are going to make the claim that smokers are not necessarily less healthy than non-smokers, you are dead wrong. FACT: As a whole, non-smokers are more healthy than smokers.

      That is all.

    3. Eric Foster says:

      “How errogant can some people be.” That made my day. Thanks. And so this post has some redeeming value, randyman, your employer is footing the bill for your healthcare costs, so it is entirely ‘their business’ what you do to incur the costs that they fund. While there are certain things that they can’t legally protect themselves against, tobacco use isn’t one of them, and it’s verifiable.

  15. Beltway Bill says:

    SO…. they can also refuse to hire gay people based on their health issues too, right. And women, since they have unique health issues right? That’s all perfectly legal right?

  16. Curly Bill says:

    Inncoent people killed? I have never heard of anyone smoking 5 cigarettes, getting into their car and crashing into a station wagon full of kids because they were too inebriated to drive. Baylor should refuse to hire anyone who drinks alcohol..

  17. Nycl Poster says:

    This has nothing to do with smoking my friends. This is how the liberals in government slowly turn each and every man against each other. This is how it starts, and get worst from here. Last I checked, smoking a cigarette is legal. This is discrimination. Whats next guys?? Not hiring fat people? Or how about people with disabilities? Wake up America, this is what the liberals have in store for us going forward. You wanted change?? Well you got it folks. I hope you like it…..

    1. Freedom (noun) says:

      Well said. The handicapped in general are already known to have higher health care costs than a fully able person -which is why the Govt. has to force us to buy overpriced insurance.
      Everybody thought it was just great that you couldn’t ‘get turned down for pre-existing conditions’ but very few of them realize that almost no insurance companies ‘turned down’ anybody anyway. They simply sell you an expensive policy that makes you pay 80% while they cover 20% -for several thousands a year in premiums lining their pockets. Obamacare should have been called the Medical Insurance Corporate Golden Parachute Act.

  18. Curly says:

    How’s about not hiring anyone with an Obama sticker on their car? Heh

    1. kbernatovich says:

      There are no more Obama bumper stickers. They were all destroyed during the ‘cash for clunkers’ fiasco!

  19. Joseph Blow says:

    What about the freedom of an employer to hire who they want?

    Nobody is telling anyone what they can or can’t do with their personal time because nobody has to work for Baylor.

    No, working at Baylor is not like working at a Nazi prison camp. Anyone is free to leave at any time.

  20. NelsonBig` says:

    It’s a Private Business. If they don’t want to hire you, there’s no need to force them. You have the right to smoke. They have the right to not hire you.

    Since when did being hired become a privilege?

    Government needs to stay the heck away from Private Business. It’s Private. They shouldn’t force you to watch something on your privately owned TV, they shouldn’t be able to tell you how to run a business either.

    P.S. No Gov’t intervention also means no subsidies. This goes both ways.

    1. RobertT says:

      So a company has the right to not hire someone they consider to be obese or overweight? After all, obesity causes unique health concerns that cost everybody else too.

      1. Bo Houff says:

        Does an employee have the right to REFUSE to work for a boss who smokes? Or an obese boss? Or a boss with red hair? Or, should an employer be able to force a person to work for it even though the president of the company smokes?

        Freedom works both ways….

      2. NelsonBig says:

        The answer is a resounding “YES”.

        If you do not get hired for being overweight, oh well. Go somewhere else. Either that, or lose some weight.

        Again, it’s a Private business. The owner should have the right to hire or fire you for ANY REASON! Just like I can do with my Private Property as I CHOOSE.

        If you don’t agree, just don’t visit that business. Boycott. That is YOUR RIGHT.

      3. NelsonBig says:

        And Bo.

        You’re thinking to hard.

        Of course an employee can quit. That’s a pretty common understanding.

  21. steamdwarf says:

    a private company should be able to hire whoever they want – period. if other segments of the population don’t like it then don’t patronize them. it’s none of the governemtn business. call me old school.

    1. Liberty says:

      You’re not old school. These are just stupid people who don’t understand basic civics.

      Shocker, I know…

      Products of our great public educational system.

  22. Grimnir says:

    Some companies should consider a policy of hiring only smokers and see how well that goes over

    1. Scott says:

      I’d assume the tobacco companies hire plenty of smokers and they seem to be doing OK.

  23. Jeff Sherman says:

    No problem with this policy, lets extend it to fat people, illegal immigrants, non Christians, people with hemmoroids, people who can’t run a mile in 7 minutes, liberals, and anyone who votes for Obama.

  24. Nets says:

    I whole heatedly agree with this policy! In Fact, they should expand this policy to include patients as well. If a patient smokes, he should be denied treatment. That would go a long way in “controlling health costs”.

    1. Orkas Eat Seals says:

      Would you be as callous toward obese patients who do not adhere to your criteria of sensible dietary practices? How about people with careless work habits. How about sports participants.

      We could justify not giving you medical treatment because there is an aspect of your life that we don’t condone. You are near the precipice of an extremely slippery slope: treatment restricted by personal preference of the care giver.

      1. Nets says:

        Now you are starting to get the point ..

        You don’t hear them saying that they will refuse the money that smokers and their “supposed” illnesses bring into the revenue stream of the hospital. It is only when they “perceive” that it costs them do they act concerned.

        It is simply someone in their upper management trying to seem important to others in upper management. Sadly, if you take a close look at other hospitals quality of care ratings after they instituted such policies, you will find that quality of care slipped.

        If they TRULY were worried about controlling “health costs”, they would tackle some of the REAL problems For example, in 2000 the Journal of the American Medical Association ( Starfield, B. July 26 pages 284, 483-485) showed that the US healthcare system itself was the third leading cause of death from unnecessary surgeries, medical errors, infections, etc… So, if they were truly worried about the cost of health care, they would focus on themselves.

        But, when you have administrators who really don’t have any other marketable skills, you get stupid policies like this which they think will show how smart they are.

        It just shows me that they opportunistic children who want to feel important. As my original statement said, if they were truly worried about costs from smokers, they would refuse the patients as well. But, that is part of their revenue stream .. So, you can smoke as long as you pay them.

        But, it won’t be long until the next “boogyman” comes along (like you said, sports participants, careless work habits, etc)… that day WILL come …

        I vote with my wallet .. and they just got crossed off my list. And, for the record, I don’t smoke .. I think it is stupid … but, it is legal and as long as it remains so should be accommodated just like all other stupid habits (like alcohol).

  25. stoptouchingthatmabel says:

    I don’t smoke but I eat fast foods and I drive over the speed limit and I like to take walks late at night in the city and I rock climb on the weekends and occasionally I base jump and I have sex with as many women as I can. Somehow I still could get that job if I applied, WHY?

  26. Orkas Eat Seals says:

    The person/people that conceived and instituted this policy are too egotistical for their and the public’s continued well being. Would we find any health related skeletons in their closet(s). Are their lives the perfect example for the millions of people around the world to replicate to the dotted i’s and crossed t’s. What will they do if something happens to their protective and isolating utopian bubble(s).

  27. reddog says:

    It is entirely okay for a company’s to manage its costs. You may not like it but it’s time we got off the backs of company’s and allowed them to lower their operating costs their way. No more regulations.

  28. KDLite says:

    For all of you who think this is a great idea because of all the money it’ll save companies in health costs, take a moment to consider how much it is going to cost to support tobacco users when they have to go on welfare and medicaid because they can’t get jobs. Ooops, there goes all your savings and more. It’s a stupid idea.
    The next thing will be bans on hiring fat folks.
    The bottom line is that people should NOT be penalized for engaging in legal activities on their own time.
    BTW, Baylor isn’t just barring smokers, they are banning ALL tobacco users and I’ve never heard of anyone being sickened or killed from secondhand snuff so arguments in this context about smoking are irrelevant.

  29. Rolly Bones says:

    Henry Ford did this type of thing in the 20’s and 30’s! It was egregious then and it is UN-American now! As long as you are willing and able to do the task that you are hired to do, it isn’t anyone’s business for any reason to monitor your personal life when not on company time. If they want to do that then they should pay you 24/7/365.

    1. Kevin Pearson says:

      Anyone who smokes demonstrates such poor judgment that they could not possibly be of any value as an employee.

      Cigarette smoke, as all smoke, contains carbon monoxide, which poisons the blood and causes the brain to be deprived of oxygen.

      1. really says:

        Then stop driving your car !! because the carbon monioxcide from your BMW gives me a headache while i am riding my bycycle

      2. Naomi Grace says:

        As an ex-smoker there is nothing you have posted that I do not agree with. You are
        exactly right.

      3. Kevin Pearson says:

        really,.,, No one I know sticks the exhaust pipe of their BMW in their face and exhales it.

        20 years ago, I was working on a job location on a golf course in Broward County. When we finished, we packed up all the trucks and trailers and left. However the truck that I was in was stuck in the mud, and every other vehicle had left before making sure that everyone was ready, and there was no one to help me, so I was stuck there alone with the driver trying to put pieces of wood or lumber under the stuck wheel to get it out, and the stuck tire was RIGHT NEXT to the exhaust pipe of the truck. I had no other option but to stay in that place for the duration to get it unstuck because there was no one else present, even though I had trouble breathing. Afterward, I was sick for days.

  30. Hiheels says:

    what about, alcoholics, diabetics and fatties?

  31. Clown Wrangler says:

    We have NO EVIDENCE that Baylor pays excessive insurance fees because their employees smoke. Where’s the proof–? Should we just take their word for it and accept that people who smoke are driving up their costs?

    If true– then premiums should drop drastically as they become completely smoker-free.

    If true–then we should see a dramatic decrease in employee claims, lost time, hospital stays, etc.

    We need statistics to go by now and in future.

    1. Liberty says:

      They have no responsibility to provide any of this information. They are a PRIVATE COMPANY. If you ever owned and operated a business you’d understand this.

      If you’re a non-smoker, apply, get a job, and then find out all of this info for yourself.

      1. Danielle says:

        So you are telilng us they are lying as to the reason why they are not going to hire smokers? You’re right, they are a private company, but if they are going to tell us that they are doing it, basically discriminating, because of health care costs then we have a right to ask for the statistics. They need the public for their revenue, as their customer we have a right to ask questions and ask for proof of statements they make.

  32. James says:

    I am just waiting for someone to make a job posting that says “due to the high cost of liberals only non-liberals will be considered viable for job openings” that would be hilarious.

  33. Armoney Washington says:

    I smoked for 35 yrs until I was taxed into submission. Then I quit cold turkey because I was not paying the taxs. I sold my business , stopped working and became a dependent of my husband. His paycheck went up and his taxs went down. Taxed Enough Already.

    1. Americanadian says:

      I smoked 45 years and quit because I was done with allowing the government to dip into my pocket every time they needed more money to cover their lavish spending habits. Now, I can live longer and receive social security checks for decades while the government spends money covering the healthcare of illegal immigrants and death row inmates.

  34. gamps says:

    I would be willing to bet that they are not polling their lawyers and lobbyists on the tobacco issue!

  35. Paul Begala says:

    ….by the way, you can forget hiring gay men. Compared to the general population, they have astronomical health care costs.


  36. Darrel says:

    “We all have the right to smoke a cigarette,” Grooms said . Really? Where in the constitution or bill of rights does it say that? The business has the “right” to hire whom they want, and you have the “right to either smoke or not smoke, but NOT to force a comapny to hire you.

    1. Danielle says:

      Yes, read the constitution, since it is not illegal to smoke we have the right to liberty, and if we so chose to smoke it is our right.

      1. Bo Houff says:

        For the sake of argument I agree that you have the right to smoke. And I, and all other business owners have the right to hire who we wish (except for federally protected race, gender, national origin matters). I could hire ALL smokers if I liked, or only folks who play disc golf and refuse to hire others. Workers have a similar right to work for whom they wish, for whatever reason.

  37. RHReese says:

    FDA says Obesity Will Cost U.S. $344 Billion a Year in Health Care Costs. So I think they are discriminating against smokers. Fat people cost more in Health care. About 150 billion more.

  38. none ya biz says:

    My company refused to hire gay men for the exact same reason.

  39. Ivan Yurkenov says:

    “White males need no apply” is the ONLY legally sanctioned discrimination. Therefore, I started my own business. BTW I do not, and will not, hire liberals.


  40. Dogula says:

    Fatties are next.

  41. Tar Heel Terry says:

    I guess that would mean Baylor would turn down an Albert Einstein for their physics department. An Eisenhower and FDR for their history faculty. Mark twain for English…

    1. old goat says:

      Those people didn’t know that smoking was deadly to their health and everybody around their smokes health. They were intelligent people and if they had known the terrible consequences undoubtedly would have quit.

      You have the right to smoke in your personally owned home but when you start contaminating my family and self your right to puff ends. I have the right to own guns but when I start shooting them at innocent people my right to own them also ends.

  42. jasperddbgghost says:

    Betcha they are hiring gays without a second thought.

    That’s a lifestyle that eats feces. Figure that one out Baylor.

  43. shawn says:

    the thing about this-is they go after smokers first then fast food eaters second…what they are doing is creating a class system… i bet you this hospital is ran by christians… i bet its owned by a church-
    fact is the a.l.a was created by christians to dominate peoples lives

  44. Mr Sticks says:

    For those of you cheering this decision…..they WILL be coming after YOU next. Don’t think it won’t happen.

    1. Liberty says:

      What will ‘they’ be coming after ‘us’ for? After the black helicopters stop hovering over your house, please tell us.

      1. Mr Sticks says:

        Do you drive a car? Do you eat an occasional sweet? Do you play any kind of sport? Do you have a drink now and then? Do you exercise regularly? No?
        You think this is funny? Of course they have the right to hire or not hire anyone they want. But when YOUR vice is known YOU will not be hired. You must be young, because you obviously haven’t noticed your rights being eroded. Remember these words when your life is totally controlled by the man!

      2. Liberty says:

        Mr Sticks –

        I’m a CEO and own my own company. I have a lot of vices…I’m allowed too.

    2. m walton says:

      When they banned smoking at my local public parks I decided to start a campaign to ban all pets from the parks. I’m getting petitions together to show the liberal dog owners that they won’t be the only ones to take things away.

  45. Lisa Murrell Collins says:

    Heres whats funny: everytime I go to any medical facility I see so many fat people it boggles my mind. Now for all of you who have said that no one makes you smoke, no one makes you cram cheeseburgers down your throat either. How long do you think that it will be before they start telling people to loose weight or get fired? How long will it be for random alcohol testing? How long until they say sports are dangerous and that you could get injured playing them? I know, you think I’m being ridiculous, but consider this. The real reason they won’t hire smokers is profit. If they get away with that, why would’nt they stop hiring the other people too if it increases their profit further?

    1. old goat says:

      Our local medical ‘chain’ does not hire smokers. Haven’t done so for about 15 years. Has helped contain costs a lot. While they would like to not hire morbidly obese people they are not allowed to make that rule. Government rules. They feel if you have the choice (smoking, drugs, etc… ) then they have the choice to not hire you.

  46. Nancy Pelosi says:

    This is nothing, wait until Obummer Care kicks in…Remember: Any government that can mandate you buy something under threat of imprisonment, can mandate everything else that follows.

  47. Jerry S says:

    Good. And quit hiring fat people too.

    1. Tar Heel Terry says:

      Won’t happen. At least not for a very long time. It all has to do with numbers and who gets to identify “bad” behaviors and write the rules. Once, a majority of Americans smoked. People left them alone. With obesity “popular” today, it’s far easier to target groups that you’re not a part of for desired corrective behavior.

  48. rick says:

    What would the commentors say if they decide not to hire blacks who smoke. Would this be wrong. Or if they won’t hire minorities because their eating habits are unhealthy. But they would never do that.

    1. Liberty says:

      Not hiring someone due to race is illegal. The rest of your post is ignorant.

  49. luke says:

    This isn’t about any companies right to hire or fire whoever they want, but the enforcement protocols that will be adopted to protect this rule. Under American law some rights are unalienable (they can’t be given or taken away), this includes a protection from unwarranted search under the 4th amendment. This does not simply protect you from the government, as the Court has said in Roe V Wade, the constitution projects a penumbra of privacy that protects all of its citizens. An employer has no legal right to run checks for a legal chemical. Any contract that has a clause claiming that they can is FRAUDULENT and ILLEGAL. The forthcoming searches will be a crime.

    There have been a lot of what ifs thrown about, a comparison of smoking and alcohol, etc etc etc. The real danger here is this, and liberals get with me, what happens when a farm in OK decides that it doesn’t want to hire any women who have had an abortion, for the same reason Baylor is denying smokers, their medical care will on average cost more. THIS IS TRUE, abortion creates possible negative medical side effects that will certainly could effect the cost of long term care. Medical data is private. NO ifs ands or buts. When did all of my fellow liberals turn into Bush like fascists?

  50. Tex_Smoker says:

    Maybe a smoker can get hired, move up the ladder and fire all old people like the Baylor CEO because their slow and ugly.

    1. Jeff Burgdorf says:

      Maybe we should hire only those who know how to use proper English grammar and spelling? Now that would be a real eye-opener. It’s “they’re” not “their” btw, and you’re missing a few commas.

  51. John Gray says:

    This is all backwards. The big reason that we are in a fiscal hole is that people are living too long, not dying too early. Put another way: if a genius invented a pill that would push life expectancy to 110 for everyone tomorrow, our national, state, and local debt would explode, and our bond ratings would be something like the Chapter 11 Blockbuster Corp. On top of that smokers pay mega $$$ for taxes, thank you very much.

    I’m not arguing this has a nice moral ring to it, but this is addressing the condescending nanny types, waxing about fiscal responsibility and using economics as an excuse to control us. I say, please buy a calculator, review your math. If you nannies are truly serious about restoring our finances you will bring back Joe Camel, cig vending machines, and candy cigarettes (yum!). A life expectancy back like we had in the 50s would put us back in surplus in a few years.

  52. CommonCents says:

    The article begins with a Marxist propaganda technique:

    “Currently there are some 14 million jobless Americans.”

    (Why is the word ‘some’ included in such a statement?)

    Try DOUBLING that number, and you might be closer to the actual figure.

  53. GozieBoy says:

    I think I won’t hire gays because they have a MUCH MUCH higher incidence of AIDS. Ooh, while true, that will bring out the loony libs and politically correct police!

  54. George Johnson says:

    Ahahahahahahahaa…… And that dumb liberal that was looking for a job, doesn’t have a CLUE about “rights”. Sure, you have the “right” to smoke a cigarette, but Baylor has the to not hire you!! THEY DO NOT HAVE TO HIRE YOU!!

    Sorry, but people that smoke, STINK! I used to smoke, and I know, I stunk too. You can’t hide it either. Perfume or aftershave, makes you stink that much more. I can smell that stench 100 yards away, in my closed car.

    This is a LONG time coming. Smokes are sick a LOT more often. I was sick almost all the time. Now that I quit, I’m hardly EVER sick! They work FAR less too. I’d take “smoke breaks” all the time, using up LOTS of time. It’s not “fair” (as liberals LOVE to use) to the other employees.

    It’s about rights. And it’s about damn time somebody started telling these nasty people, “I’m not hiring you”.

    Of course they’ll whine about “rights” and the ACLU will get involved and nobody will have ANY rights to do ANYthing any more.

    1. luke says:

      I almost contested this comment, but everything I wrote couldn’t come close the the bigotry and idiocy of this comment. Looks like you’ve been taking your right to drink a little too seriously. I can smell a drunk even across the internet.

    2. GeorgeJetson says:


      What’s next, after smoking is gone?
      Potato Chips, Twinkies…then after bad food is cut out…what kind of car? Is it a high safety rated one or a flashy sportscar…I wonder if it will ever get to hair color……
      How many steps until we’re all the same?

  55. Skinny says:

    If a hospital decides not to hire smokers on the basis of health costs, then they are also morally obligated NOT to hire obese people on the same premise. Obesity is as much a health issue as is smoking.

  56. Paul says:

    If one drinks a glass of red wine daily one will live longer than a person who does not. Christ drank wine. Every cigarette smoked shortens one’s life and increases health care costs. Taken the right way wine is good for one’s health while tobacco is not. Why is this so hard to understand?

    1. Ted says:

      This is not true. Grape juice is now the gold standad for obtaining your resveretrol (the beneficial substance in red wine) and is much better for you than red wine.

      1. Jeff Burgdorf says:

        Not true … all the carbs in your grape juice is why you are so fat. Go with the one glass of wine, the resveratrol is at least 100 times more concentrated in wine (red wine) than any grape juice.

  57. Jack says:

    Could just switch to an electronic cigarette, such as the vgo from It eliminates all the problems that everyone complains about, like smell, 2nd hand smoke, tar, etc.

  58. jschmidt says:

    Interesting tact. Perhaps the more acceptable action would be for the employer to charge a premium for medical insurance coverage. But the employer certainly suffers more when an employee is ill, or out of work because of smoking. But will alcohol be the next evil to be attacked? How about gambling addictions? or being overweight, cholesterol too high. THis is a slippery slope.

  59. zenzencool says:


    If you or someone that you know watch porn, or engage in unusual activity please apply here for a job. We are an agency open to all who smokes, drinks, swings, eats fried foods, or is overweight.

    Our health insurance is the best in the world!

  60. Matthew J. Weaver says:

    Good move. I definitely support not hiring smokers.

  61. Andy says:

    Another charming Texas novelty. Legal discrimination.

    Most states prohibit employers from controlling their employee’s off duty behaviors as long as those are lawful.

    Apparently Texans are above the law – and common decency as well.

  62. justavoter says:

    Baylor must be full of liberal democrats. Only democrats can be cigarette nazis. I personally stopped smoking, but somebody that tries to control others from smoking are control freaks and enjoy making everybody else’s life miserable. Since Baylors does not want to hire people that smoke, maybe Baylor should be boycotted just like they boycot others. Let them know how it feels to be boycotted.

  63. luke says:

    Trolls attack because they get a high from seeing other people squirm, and sink to their level. I don’t like ’em either, but they win when they get banned and removed.

    As for your lack of belief in censorship, you disprove it in the same sentence. Who is the arbiter of something actually being said?

    All people have a reason to exist; even from the seemingly senseless an intelligent person can learn something. Trash talking a troll brings you to his level, and that was his goal the whole time. Can’t you feel it in the last sentence of you post.

    1. luke says:

      This is directed at M i don’t understand why its up here

  64. HPS says:

    I am AMAZED at the STUPIDITY of some of these companies.. FIRST thing off is NO ONE will tell their doctors that they SMOKE.. SECOND more people will NOT GO to the doctors till SOMETHING non related to SMOKING is wrong with them.. also no one will tell the potential employers they smoke.. any nicotine in their systems they will claim come for those NICOTINE drops or something similar..Smoking does NOT increase the cost of health care.. Insurance companies are allowed to USE that as an excuse.. MOST smokers are healthier than NON SMOKERS who are couch potatoes.. and than we have the fact that WORKING smokers are FORCED to pay taxes to support POT SMOKERS who we all know are LAZY COUCH POTATOES.. HOWEVER.. NOTHING is being done about that.. so let SMOKERS keep their TAX dollars to put towards their health insurance and let the POT smokers get jobs.. how does that work IF the smoker DOESN’T want the companies HEALTH CARE..? Could be they are on their SPOUSES policy..

    1. Jeff Burgdorf says:

      Hahaha … you don’t have to tell a doctor that you smoke. The moment we look in your mouth, we can tell. Even if you brush your tongue (which most don’t do anyway), the back of your throat and cheeks are covered with the yellow tar residues that collect on your mucus membranes. Think what your lungs look like, think that you will never see your grand-children.

      Just quit smoking, you fools.

      All other things being equal, no smoker is healthier than any non-smoker. Ever. Never. Every smoker is doing irrepairable harm to their bodies.

      What this has to do with pot smokers is beyond me though … oh wait, your whole post is idiotic.

  65. mcandler says:

    had a mother who killed herself with cigarettes and lung disease (which led to heart and circulatory issues). It was all unnecessary and shortened her life and enjoyment of life. Good for Baylor for not enabling

    1. Robert Jones says:

      Sorry about your mom. I smoked for nearly 30 years before I quit. I wish I never had started.

      I agree with your premise. However, Baylor did ban smoking at their campuses. These people or smokers are doing this on their off time.. not on the job.. Therefore, there is NO enabling.

    2. HPS says:

      Was your mom a couch potato?? usually circulatory problems are caused by either having them from birth OR not doing any real physical old was your mom? I am not being mean in asking my mom died from cirrhosis of the liver.. however she didn’t drink .. People keep insisting they can PREVENT everything and they are in control when in reality THEY aren’t.. unless we wear bubble wrap SOMETHING will get us.. Saying … eat healthy.. exercise.. and die anyway..

  66. me says:

    So if you start smoking, will they fire you?
    If you have ever had cancer, can they refuse to hire you?
    If you are too old or drive too fast, are you out of luck too?

  67. DejaDave says:

    Will they also ban gay males because of the increased risk and expense of treating HIV/AIDS?

    1. Coon Hunter says:

      Rightfully so. More expenses too.

  68. Skybottle1 says:

    Typical progressive group. Where does most of funding come from–taxes paid by common people, bet large percentage from tobacco tax. Bunch of progressive idotys.

  69. john galt says:

    how is the millions collected from smokers FOR THE CHILDREN ECT going to be replaced? as usual unintended consequences will be much worse than the original problem

  70. Van Wehrle says:

    Whatever happened to “my body, my choice” ?

    Since obesity is right up there with creating higher costs and they are not refusing obese people, then their selection to exclude one group and not another seems that it fall into the category of discrimination.

    1. Jack Russell says:

      Since when did ‘discrimination’ become a bad word? I discriminate when I buy bread, when I hire a painter, when I choose a car to drive, when I decide which neighborhood to live in and where to go to church. Baylor has EVERY RIGHT to ‘discriminate’ against smokers. If they want to discriminate against other behaviors that the law hasn’t poked their nose in and said they must hire, they can CHOOSE to exclude them through discrimination. Baylor does NOT OWE ANY SMOKERS A JOB.

      1. Van Wehrle says:

        Liberal types like it both ways, they wont allow businesses to have smoking inside even though it’s THEIR BUSINESS CHOICE. laughable.

  71. JOSE says:


    1. Really says:

      Stop driving your CAR so we can BREATH , tired of sucking your exaust fumes day after day after day . Jose your comment look as if your are brain dead you forgot to hit the caps button !

  72. Larry Greenwalt says:

    I work for Scott’s and we have banned smokers (nicotine users) for years

  73. eric6161 says:

    Dennis… one day they’ll arrest you for child abuse if you smoke near a child. It’s all a scam… just thank a progressive… they were the ones that made people want to eat bacon and eggs in the early ’20th century. They convinced the Germans that it was ok to help the jews, gays, mentally ill, etc. die early since they didn’t have a quality of life.

  74. bamaIsGodAwful says:

    Let’s see. No women child of child bearing age since birthing is expensive, no people with diabetes, hypertension, high cholesterol, heart disease, artery disease, cancer history, or risky family history, no persons with speeding tickets, no older persons.

    1. Jack Russell says:

      No stupid. Just no smokers. Sorry, FAIL!

  75. Steven says:

    Good for Baylor. Why should they hire people who are big health risks. If a person makes a deliberate choice to poison their body with smoking (and for the life of me I will never, ever understand why anyone starts smoking), then IMO any company should have the right to refuse to hire them.

    Same goes with people who are fatties and obviously don’t care about their bodies. If someone wants to keep eating too much food, and sitting on their lazy fat azzes instead of exercising, too bad.

    1. mj01323 says:

      You presume that all people that are overweight don’t care about their bodies. Let’s say you are an exercise freak. It is the most important thing in your life. Your life is unbalanced and you pick up germs in the gym and run with traffic while wearing dark clothing in the morning when it is still dark. Are you stupid? Without question. You couldn’t possibly care about your own body.

      Then there are the times you like to smoke a little dope with your friends. And the all too often times you drink beer with your buddies and drive home with a little buzz. Not only do you not care about your body, you don’t care about anyone else. You are a fool.

    2. wildbill6996 says:

      You sound like a man who has a stash of marijuana at home. Does your smoking ban ONLY apply to TABACCO or does it include your recreational habit ????

  76. Teek says:

    GOOD! Now there is precedent to not hire fat people!!! Thanks Baylor….seriously….thank U.

  77. Mune Shadowe says:

    I doubt they will do drinking alcohol since most inside the beltway are stoned out of their gourds most the time.

  78. Keith says:

    In 1965 it is estimated that 50% of all men and 33% of all woman smoked. How did we ever produce anything to become the richest nation on earth?

  79. John L. says:

    Yea? And what about other people who are at high risk for things like HIV or AIDS? What about people who go out after work and have a “few” to unwind after a hard day at work? Aren’t they a health, (accident), risk? What about “after work” drivers, motorcycle & bicycle riders, skydivers, bungee jumpers, skateboarders, hikers, beach goers, sun worshipers, soccer, baseball, football and basketball players? What about frequent flyers? How about people who have swimming pools or trampolines on their property? Aren’t they all risks to employers who offer medical benefits? My dad smoked since he was a teen and lived 77 years. He didn’t have much to do about exercise, sports or risky business when it came to sex. Maybe he would have lived longer if he didn’t smoke, but maybe he would have died sooner if he took one or more of the other risks that people, (who Baylor won’t discriminate against), take every day.

    1. mj01323 says:

      John you know the reality is that tobacco users, particularly smokers, are easy pickings. According to the article 20% of the people smoke. Most who smoke would like to quit.

      Baylor talks big about cutting down on their costs. They do not have to prove that their health care costs are lower for non-smokers. They are not serious about significantly reducing their own health care cost.

      Look at the risky activities you mentioned. Why not refuse to hire anyone who engages in those you have listed.

      You won’t see Baylor refusing to hire people that drink because this would limit the employment pool to an unacceptable level. Alcoholism is considered a disability.

      Baylor will not refuse to hire people HIV or AIDS, or those who engage in high risk sexual activities. These conditions, illnesses or practices are considered private.

      We continue to see employers who discriminate against practices that they can get away with. Plain and simple.

      I do wonder how long it will be before employers will require a complete medical history, including histories of family members.

  80. Jessup says:

    Let’s face it, if companies could truly pick and choose who they hire, the exclusion of negroes alone would shoot productivity through the roof and get us back on a first world footing.

    1. Brian W says:


  81. Brian W says:

    Stop giving free medical to all the illegals who use hospitals as a free doctors visit. Baylor can then afford the Obamacare medical cost increases and not discriminate while hiring. Two birds, one stone. Problem solved.

  82. pspath says:

    HIV positive individuals and those with AIDS incur very high annual health care costs. Much higher than the average smoker. Does Baylor still hire these people? Of course! It is not politically correct to deny employment to this group of people. Smokers are singled out because it is OK to do that.

    1. bullrider says:

      Smokers CAN choose to quit smoking just as they chose to start. It’s not easy but it can be done if they want to. However apparently many are too weak-willed to quit (including our alleged President who also is puffing his brains out) and as such they subject themselves to paying ridiculous taxes to buy cigs for their habit.

      If they insist on letting themselves be subjected to the insane tax called ‘the tobacco settlement’ then that is their business. Puff and stink away people!

  83. Kmy says:

    Baylor, as a private company, has the right to use whatever qualifications and deal-breakers it wants in hiring. We should applaud their exercising this right, especially when doing so gores our particular ox. That the oxen should then logically include the car-riders, the obese, the sexually active, the hypertensive, the other drug users and those genetically predisposed to the wide assortment of chronic illnesses is irrelevant. Those who applaud Baylor’s move only because they want to stick it to smokers will, if they live long enough, get what they wish for and scream that the private company does not have the right to reject them.

  84. PatriotLady says:

    $200 billion, huh? That’s less than it costs to be involved in this country’s latest stimulus. You know, the bankers and wall street? I don’t smoke, but if $200 billion is what they’re complaining about, they better get better motivated. Better declare tobacco and nicotine forbidden, likened unto Prohibition. See what good that will do you. Better yet, why not legalize and tax marijuana, cocaine, meth, and the other enjoyments. I don’t partake, but sounds like a good corner street market, taxed, to me. You’ll never be rid of them. May as well make some profit off of them.

  85. Rebecca says:

    Yeah, you have a right to smoke. You don’t have a right to work there. The people complaining about them not banning other lifestyle choices are being silly. It’s Baylor’s choice. If they don’t want to hire smokers, they don’t have to. Nobody force them to be “equal” and not hire unhealthy people across the board. Seriously.

    Not like this is the first time smokers haven’t been hired over it. More than a few small businesses out there will generally avoid hiring smokers, because their productivity levels are so much lower than nonsmokers.

  86. Chandra Gupt says:

    When media and WH says its good no one minds when they Congress by the people say no we panic what happen to freedom of choice i guess we are in (zazi state/ Zolice congress says or zoplice state) No its wrong for you we decide whats good for you means you are back in slavery in plantation by people who we choose to make laws so they can keep implementing slavery e,g bailouts

  87. KDLite says:

    For those who think this is a great idea because they aren’t guilty, think on this:
    First they came for the communists,
    and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a communist.

    Then they came for the trade unionists,
    and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a trade unionist.

    Then they came for the Jews,
    and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a Jew.

    Then they came for me
    and there was no one left to speak out for me.

    How long will it be before they come after your “unhealthy” behavior…

    1. bullrider says:

      KDLite said some things to which I will respond:
      KDLite: For those who think this is a great idea because they aren’t guilty, think on this:
      First they came for the communists,
      and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a communist.

      Heck the PRESIDENT is a communist, or at least believes in putting them in positions of economic power. (green jobs czar Van Jones)

      Then they came for the trade unionists,
      and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a trade unionist.

      Well Obama is sure not ‘coming for the trade unionists’, they want to keep him in power because he trades money and influence for their votes.

      Then they came for the Jews,
      and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a Jew.

      And the Jews if they had any brains would realize Obama and the Dems are the biggest enemy the Jews and Israel have ever had in this country.

  88. Chandra Gupt says:

    what happen to freedom of choice?

    1. bullrider says:

      Freedom of choice is not just for you Chandra. You are free to smoke. Baylor is free to hire or not hire smokers. If you want to ask that question in a more pertinent way, post in an article about Obamacare.

  89. Evil Warlord says:

    I own a moderate size company and I put the no smokers policy in effect back in 2000.

  90. Patrick says:

    I wouldn’t hire a fat person for the same reason. Fat people should be charged higher insurance rates and have a required medicare “fat premium”. Maybe then Americans will start loosing weight. This country didn’t used to have all of the fat people it now has. I was recently in Milan for a few weeks and I saw almost no one who was fat. What the hell is happening to us?

    1. Jeff Burgdorf says:

      You’re absolutely correct. I go to China on business half a dozen times a year, and you would rarely ever see any native Chinese that is even remotely overweight — outside of Shanghai and Beijing that is (both cities are inundated with McDonalds & other American fast good places).

      We can look the other way, but our typical American diet is causing the obesity we see here today.

      However, it comes to personal choice. You choose to be fat, or you don’t. It really is that simple, no matter what anyone deceives themselves into believing otherwise.

  91. stoptouchingthatmabel says:

    It’s one thing to hire an older person who has smoked for twenty plus years it’s another to hire someone who has smoked for three years. Smoking doesn’t kill you right away like alcohol can and you don’t have to be the one drinking. If you are going to pick a poison then use some common sense and stop being politically correct in your lame attempt at self-righteousness. There are so many other habits, activities or pre-existing conditions you could choose from. By the way would you also deny employment to someone who has type I diabetes or arrhythmia and wouldn’t that be discrimination? If you are going to use that argument for smokers about your costs then you better apply it to everything or else you are discriminating.

  92. Bob Smith says:

    Smokers are drug addicts, plain and simple! Why should an employer have to hire drug addicts? In general, drug addicts have a lower life expectancy than non-addicts, not to mention the lost work time when the addicts take a break to get their fix. They shouldn’t have been stupid children who started smoking! (no mature adults start smoking; at least no smokers who started within the past 40 years)

    1. Really says:

      Bob, I think you are or will be on some type of prescription drug in the next few yrs, how do I know ? your methodically thought out post has the couth of a kitten.

    2. bullrider says:

      Bob Smith said “They shouldn’t have been stupid children who started smoking! (no mature adults start smoking; at least no smokers who started within the past 40 years).”

      Amen. And I’ve seen more than enough lawsuits where people or their surviving family sued Big Tobacco claiming that the person did not know that smoking was dangerous, nicotine was addictive, they might get cancer, etc. etc. looking to blame someone else for their own bad choice. 150 years ago cigarettes were called ‘coffin nails’. I think people have the right to smoke, I think the government used the ‘tobacco settlement’ just as an excuse to throw a huge tax on smokers, I think it’s ridiculous and unfair, BUT I also believe Baylor has the right to not hire people with chemical dependencies, especially those which cost them money or hurt their quality of care by smelling so bad.

  93. George O says:

    If medical costs are the issue, then Baylor should not hire women. Medical expense data indicate that women’s medical expenses are nearly five times that of men. Women are always trotting off to the doctor. For them, it’s almost as fun as shopping.

  94. jordan w says:

    Alaska Airlines has had that same policy since 2000. You would not be hired if you failed a nicotine test however, after you were accepted into the union (6 months) you could smoke without repercussions.

  95. Fanny Forbes Franklen says:

    How Mass Media May Shape Deep Reality Assumptions? Lung Cancer, Smoke And The Trinity Test in the Your Health section … very interesting article about where cancer may come from.

  96. Penny says:

    Hmmm… What about the overweight, drinkers or those who are promiscuous or practice risky sex? All these are dangerous to personal health. Makes you wonder when medical providers will stop treating different groups of people.

  97. Really says:

    I would like to ban all forms of transportation as they put out 120000 x more carbon monoxcide than a cigarette at best , I dont mind people who smoke not my deal, By the time this article is republished in 60 yrs most of you will be long gone taking a dirt nap from congestive heart failure or cancer without ever knowing what it is to have a smoke after sex, perspective puff a smoke for 80 yrs might still live put your mouth around a tail pipe for 2 min and see what happens,.Children are exposed to low levels of CO from breathing outdoor air, with those in high-traffic urban environments likely to breathe in more CO from car exhaust than kids in rural areas . Knuclehead of the day

    Kevin Pearson ( as posted above) still laughing !!!!!

    Anyone who smokes demonstrates such poor judgment that they could not possibly be of any value as an employee.

    Cigarette smoke, as all smoke, contains carbon monoxide, which poisons the blood and causes the brain to be deprived of oxygen.

  98. Half-Centurian says:

    Folks…Sugar is a drug too. Eat your unsalted peas, while Obama eats Lobster, and smokes like a “COAL-FIRED POWER PLANT”. Remember Barry’s doing it all for you!

  99. Half-Centurian says:

    Baylor has the right to choose who they hire. End of story!

    My neighbors in the evening vent their apartments, they have dogs and cats, and they are all obese and smoke. I am stuck here while I retrain in a Community College and the lifestyle I see is shocking.

    At the corner Mc Donalds/ Chevron the kids (college age) roll in with their food stamp cards, purchase candy, and crp I would not feed a lizard, then whip out the cash for smokes, and booze. Man what a country…Freedom of Choice! on the taxpayers back end. What a country.

  100. Really says:

    Jack Russell, assuming you own a dog named after your user name ? every employee cost money , even yourself standing by the water cooler or Monday mornings when you B.S about who lost who won ! second thought YOUR FIRED ! see ya monday JACK !

  101. Roddy Pfeiffer says:

    Can’t have any fat people, anybody from a family with mental or physical health problems. For that matter, no blacks. They have more diabetes, high blood pressure and obesity than the general population.

  102. mj01323 says:

    The reality is that employers will discriminate against prospective employees so long as there are more people looking for jobs than there are jobs available. If you needed to hire 1,000 people and you had only 800 applicants, hiring standards would drop dramatically. Today we have at least 14 million unemployed; needless to say, there are nowhere near that number of jobs available. So it is easy to be picky.

    Hospitals need sick people to keep them in business, in the same way states need tax revenues from tobacco and alcohol. If people did not engage in risky, dangerous and dumb activities and lifestyles, we would not need as many doctors and hospitals.

  103. CJ Grisham says:

    Good for them! It’s very simple. If you want a job, just stop smoking!

  104. mike says:

    In my experience most of these anti-smoking thugs are former smokers who are just bitter. Let them rot, and let me choose.

    1. bullrider says:

      Mike said “In my experience most of these anti-smoking thugs are former smokers who are just bitter. Let them rot, and let me choose.”

      Baylor has as much right to not hire a stinking lung-rotted smoker as you have to rot your lungs and stink. Puff away. BTW I AM a former smoker and quitting is one of the best things I ever did. I cannot believe I let myself walk around smelling like that for all those years, and believe me, if you smoke, you stink like cr ap!

      1. old goat says:

        My daddy smoked the entire time I was growing up. I had no idea just how badly my clothes, hair, house etc… smelled until I moved out. Disgusting!

        My Daddy finally quit at age 67 and is doing extremely well now. If he can do it then so can the rest of you. Tobacco, crack, heroin–they are all terrible drugs and if you need them that makes you an addict.

        I agree with Baylor.

      2. old goat says:

        Sorry if that comment came out wrong. I was trying to agree with YOU!!!

  105. Kenny says:

    Good for them. Hope they stand their ground.

  106. S.F says:

    Baylor is a Christian university and probably ascribes to the teaching that our bodies are temples of God, see: 1 Corinthians 6:19.

    Is anyone forced to hire someone who is not acceptable in a work place?

    A “legally permissible lifestyle” is not necessarily a good one or ethical.

  107. Bluec says:

    Things like race, gender, ethnicity or national origin cannot be considered when hiring an employee.

    Odd, i seem to recall the EEOC forcing a trucking company to rehire a self confessed alcoholic they fired.

    I seem to recall the EEOC sued Old Dominion freightline because they claimed it violated the Americans With Disabilities Act l to fire someone because of a physical or mental disability and as long as the employee was attempting to seek treatment they HAD to be allowed access to the workforce. In the case of nicotine addiction treatment can range from chewing gum to the Betty Ford clinic. I guess Baylor would have to PROVE the smoker wasn’t trying to quit. Good luck with that considering all the employee has to say is that they cut their nicotine intake by 50% in an attempt to ween themselves off.

    If the government actually a cra p they would outlaw tobacco like they did crack and heroin.

  108. bill says:

    Smokers stink up the hallways as they re-enter the building from smoke break. The smoke does take a while to purge from their lungs and they leave a smoke trail from the outside door clear up to their office! They don’t mind sharing their poisonous cloud of chemicals with their coworkers who choose NOT TO SMOKE. Just like loud bikers, they claim they have the right to smoke anywhere and offend everyone else because . I like Baylors decision to leave the smokers with their nasty habit at home. 🙂

    1. Naomi Grace says:

      I wish there was a like button

  109. roneida says:

    America will never appear serious about the health dangers of smoking until we force our stupid government to stop subsidising tobacco growth and manufacturing. It is disgusting and amoral how our government has all these sanctimonius positions about health and calories on menus and peanut labels etc. but they aid and abet tobacco. What a bunch of liars. Tobacco would never be allowed if it were a manufactured drug. All the left wing crybabies go on and on about the profits the drug companies make but they don’t have the guts to talk about tobacco companies. The drug companies at least help illions of patients with their products. Who does the tobacco companies help except funeral homes?

  110. Hypocrites! says:

    Around every Baylor facility there are lakes with high mercury levels, so don’t hire anyone that swims. Or anyone that jogs outside breathing in the carbon monoxide exhaust from the passing vehicles. Or eats from lead emitting dishes or chewed on lead painted toys as a child. Ever lived or worked in a building containing mold, mildew or fungus due to dry wall, flooding or leaks. Perform random blood tests for any one with HIV or AIDS. Eliminate anyone that ever worked around asbestos, coal dust, agent orange, household cleaners, chemicals or polluted water and air. Get rid of anyone that lives in a minority neighborhood filled with illegals or ever worked around them, because they are bringing TB, German measles and polio back into this country.

    The list continues with Lost Bozo’s post. The medical profession knew, kept silent on so many of these problems, but had no problem pocketing the money for the tobacco lawsuit along with the lawyers, instead of the money going to the smokers to kick the nicotine. Everything was conveniently blamed on tobacco, however, everyone knows that tobacco is not the only culprit nor is it the only compulsive behavior in the workplace. Ironically, it was a behavior promoted by the medical industry through commercials, advertisements and day time TV. Hypocrites!

    The least productive workers are not smokers, it is employees with children. They are always taking off work, transmitting their kids crud around the workplace and sticking the single employees with working all of the holidays.

    Now let’s look at the medical profession: full of druggies and drunks, thieves of over billing & medical fraud, incompetence galore that they had to push tort reform, staff that literally waddles down the hall and psycho ego manics. Anyone 55 and above has already excepted the fact that the medical industry overall is so incompetent that we accept death as a way of life, liquidated our assets and will stick them with the bill since we deserve the same as every illegal that never pays a bill and does double dipping with under the table wages and sucking on the welfare system. We have tried to beat them, but now we have to join them.

    So good luck health care industry, because it is now going to be your profession to meet government regulations and mandates with drastic cuts in research and doing more with less. Hope you like it, because Obama Care is not going away.

  111. StaticKlingon says:

    IIf it’s not tobacco, it will be something else. The fact that people do anything that our ivory tower elite don’t approve of is irritating to “those who know best.”
    Kiss your freedoms goodbye. Do as you’re told. There is no room for variance. We are the Borg. You WILL be assimilated.

  112. Russ says:

    “We all have the right to smoke a cigarette,” Grooms said in disagreement. “I can understand not [smoking] on their property, but to not hire somebody for smoking…”

    Yes, you have the right to smoke a cigarette. And they have the right to not hire someone who smokes. Get it? I work at a hospital and am a former smoker. We cannot have healthcare “professionals” – including anyone who works in a hospital – walking around the place, stinking of cigarette smoke. And believe me, if you smoke on the way to work or leave the property to smoke during lunch, you will stink. Believe me, you will STINK. Go work in some field where stinking like that is not disgusting and contradictory.

  113. Hank Warren says:

    Useless public employees and their useless rules, yet another violation of our rights. Add it to the list of gov’t violations of our rights:
    They violate the 1st Amendment by placing protesters in cages, banning books like “America Deceived II” and censoring the internet.
    They violate the 2nd Amendment by confiscating guns.
    They violate the 4th and 5th Amendment by molesting airline passengers.
    They violate the entire Constitution by starting undeclared wars for foreign countries.
    Impeach Obama, vote for Ron Paul.
    (Last link of Banned Book):

  114. SteveMurzin says:

    You can make a discrimination case here. Just as Obama said he would not raise taxes on the poor, he did. He raised the taxes on tobacco. Most tobacco is consumed by the poor. In this employment case, most smokers are poor. It’s not an assault on the smoker, it’s an assault on the poor. The fact is that poor people have statistically unhealthier lifestyles. I’m sure there is a lawyer out there that can beat Baylor.

  115. derekcrane says:

    As a restaurant owner with about 50 employees, I can agree with not hiring smokers. They are not as productive because they have to take a nicotine break every hour — on my time. I found that docking them 5 minutes for every hour worked is a good way to weed them out.

  116. benfranklin says:

    If I ever want to sue a company for discrimination, I don’t think the lawyer, Thomas, would be the one to go to. He completely ignores the new ADAAA regulations on disability discrimination. This company has publicly declared it perceives all smokers riddled with diseases it wants to avoid to save money. I think every smoker could file a charge with the EEOC for disability discrimination against this company. Smoking is an addiction and coupled with how this company perceives such addiction, it is denying employment opportunities to the disabled smokers. Go get em, smokers !

  117. southern_comment says:

    And the only idiot comments I see on here belong to you Jack and your judgemental condescension. I think people have brought up some great points but your response – i see a lot of stupid comments here. Leave then obviously you are just too ‘smart’ for the rest of us.

  118. Dave says:

    You’re next fatty!!!!

  119. Ron Burgandy says:

    From the article:

    “We all have the right to smoke a cigarette,” Grooms said in disagreement.

    And Baylor has the right not to hire you, period.

  120. Second hand scam says:

    Anyone know anyone who died from second hand smoke? Nope didn’t think so. If it were true every bartender and stewardess from back in the day should be dead. Smoking is an easy target so they can go against it. Let them try not hiring fattys which is the real health care crisis. More people including children are obese than there are smokers and will triple in no time. Or how about a transvestite who wants to be a nurse or any gays. There are far worse things people breath in every day than cig smoke. And the gay lifestyle is pretty risky too. Alcohol does way worse damage on a daily basis to more innocent people than cigs ever will. Yet they will hire illegals to clean, way to go! After cigs be prepared all you fattys and fruitcakes and boozers you willl be next.

  121. R.G. Frano, A-EMT-4-Paramedic, ACLS says:

    …I’m a retired (’32-commendation’ urban-911-experienced…) paramedic.
    Suppose I don’t get hired, even though I DON’T use nicotine?
    It’s just like that old adage / urban rumor: cocaine can be detected on EVERY $20 bill in circulation…
    One could probably detect nicotine (& 1000’s of other industrial pollutants) in EVERY functioning pair of mammal lungs on earth…

    Try determining PRECISELY WHERE those chemicals came from, Mr. & Mrs. Employer!

    Run THAT by Baylor Health Care System’s personal dept., (with a $50 million ‘hiring – discrimination’ lawsuit, hovering, in the background, like a heliopter gunship; harrassment-vs.-harrassment!), and we’ll see how long this filthy, unethical, unprofessional ‘policy’ holds up!
    (BTW: I DON’T live anywhere near these greed-blinded criminals, and, after 22 winters on ambulances, I DON’T want to do anything similar…so someone else will have to challenged this…).

  122. JC says:

    Too bad that rule didn’t apply to POTUS applicants 3-4 years ago.

  123. Ann Kenevan says:

    What about the other high risk behaviors?

  124. Bill says:

    O.K. Are the high costs related to AIDS treatment going to also be used to deny employment to those considered “high risk” for AIDS infection? Just wondering where it ends.

  125. TJP says:

    Smoking removes an average of 8 years from your life, and probably an equal number of working years. It also impacts your health leading up to that, resulting in more sick days and lower efficiency. Why should employers have to hire workers that if they stay on, will almost certainly start costing them more money some years down the line? Especially in a weak job market where it’s relatively easy to find people who aren’t addicted to nicotine?

    Chewing tobacco, incidently, doesn’t damage your lungs – it just gives you mouth and throat cancer.

  126. motorman says:

    wait till everyone has to quit smoking and all those high tax dollars go away. the govts will be more broke than they are now.

  127. TJP says:

    Oh, and for those of you trying to pass off cigarettes as ok because some people drink and drive – that’s faulty logic. Obviously, second-hand smoke isn’t a major concern. And yes, overeating kills as well – I’d be fine with refusing to hire people over a certain weight – and yes, cars give off a lot more exhaust than a smoker does. However, cars are outdoors and smokers still smell horrible and make it difficult for some people to breathe near them indoors. And smoking definitely impacts productivity and healthcare costs, even if it -only- knocks off an average of 8 years of your life.

    Drinking (to excess), smoking, and overeating should all be things that put you under everyone else when it comes to hiring.

  128. michael wallace says:

    Here are a few obvious but seldom mentioned truths regarding this issue:

    1. Smoking stinks. Tobacco smoke leaves a bad odor on everything it comes into contact with. Even smokers consider the smell to be unclean.
    2. Smokers are very visible and make easy targets. Since the majority of people do not smoke and are offended by truth #1 and the fact that smoking has negative effects on your health it’s easy to appear that your doing something to promote a healthy environment by banning it.
    3. Smokers actually save the taxpayers billions of dollars. Yes, they eventually get sick and will be in need of healthcare but so will everyone eventually. Smokers do not live as long as non-smokers. The healthiest people will live the longest and collect decades more of Social Security and Medicare while we pay for treatment of their chronic ailments and diseases.
    4. The obese are definitely next as they are also very visible.

  129. Nancy in MA says:

    I recommend using a breathalyzer and random urine tests if you really want to cut healthcare costs. Also, weigh people as they arrive at work. Perhaps people with diabetes need not apply – very expensive. Will they also insist that the spouse and any dependents be perfect?

    Ask anyone in the medical field about the real secret health risks.

    Just make tobacco illegal…good luck.

  130. JimsTowne says:

    PING Golf in AZ does the same thing. It is called “life style discrimination” and in some states it is illegal. It used to be illegal in AZ until about 2006 but, now it is not.

  131. ts says:

    This is discrimination and anyone who smokes and was denied a position should sue.

  132. Watson says:

    May this spread World Wide!!! BRAVO!! Finally someone has taken a stand!

  133. GF says:

    When are they going to start discriminating agains people who eat french fries, do not excersice daily, eat white bread and bacon…

  134. ggoblue says:

    it is not a financial decision. its a political decision.

    nothing on earth destroys health like being gay. the life expectancy of a gay male EVEN WITHOUT AIDS is 30 yrs less than a straight. the next target will be the overweight. this is about telling us how to live our lives, PERIOD.

  135. Chris says:

    Then they should not hire peope that drink alcohol. Alcoholics and chronic drinkers contribute to the health care excesses as much as smokers do. ie, cirrhosis, heart disease, alcohol treatment etc. This is a ridiculous policy unless you add in people who drink alcohol.

  136. Ray says:

    try e-cigs or e-mods …no smoke …. and you pick the level of nicotine …0 -?
    the e-cigs the batties are junk …make your own for pennies … use a stronger battery….

  137. mapersaud says:

    What about the employer’s right to employ whomever he wishes? Do we as a society have the right to force an employer to employ or not employ a particular person? When we run to the government as our granddaddy to protect us from the big bad employer…he will assume the role as father…and limit our freedom.
    On the other hand, we do have the right to choose whether we will support a company or not!

    1. Angi Hillin says:

      We force them to hire minorities, we force them to hire handicapped, we force them to hire women…we force companies every day to hire people. Either they have a choice or they don’t. Discrimination doesn’t become good just because you approve of it. Bigotry is bigotry. Mistreating a segment of society based on lifestyle choice, gender, religion, race, or politics is wrong to any decent person(not that I saw a lot of these on this thread). They may have good reasons for not hiring any of the above. I know if most of my employees are Christian and I hire a Muslim then I have to put with a ton of new headaches in the workplace, including their abuse of the Muslim or the Muslims abuse of them. In that case perhaps discrimination by religion is a good choice..however, let one employee try that and they’ll be up on discrimination charges.

      I agree that an employer has the right to hire whoever they want, but I believe it’s WITHOUT QUESTION. We should not force an employer to hire ANYONE. But if we are going to make discrimination illegal, then we have to make ALL discrimination illegal. We all don’t make the same choices in life, and my stupid choice is your smart one.

      The whole point is fixing to be useless anyhow since Obamacare will take care of everyone. Baylor will no longer have to pay smoker’s insurance…will they be hiring them I wonder…I think the truth will come then.

      1. Angi Hillin says:

        Oops, sorry, that was supposed to be an independent response, not directed at you.

  138. Tar Heel Terry says:

    I wonder how Baylor plans to deal with non-applicant members of a household that might smoke. Most employee health plans I’ve ever been involved with cover the immediate family in addition to the employee. What if I’m “clean” and my spouse isn’t?

  139. lolnofactsjustnamecallin says:

    well if dems get their way she won’t have to worry about forcing her way onto any job she wants

    then again if business are forced to hire people they don’t want… wonder how long they’ll stay open lol

  140. dam says:

    Stick that in your pipe and smoke it!

  141. Ivanthedestroyer says:

    IDIOTS. These people are poorly educated and prejudiced. Sadly, Obesity is FAR more Costly and Destructive in terms of Healthcare. You have everything from pathogological fractures, diabetes to CAD …PLEASE!!! These people badly need a Class Action Lawsuit for Discrimination. Additionally, About 50-percent of healthcare professionals smoke. I know.

    CANCER is partly a Genetic Disease and is inherent in people with weak genes. Perhaps, smoking is not good, nor is ETOH, or those ANIT-PSYCH pills the Doctor gives you! However, People with Weak lungs will get CA from Air pollution, pollen, or a myriad of other environmental factors. Many non-smokers get Lung Cancer! An educated medical professional should know this! However, the idiots in administration are often “accountants and lawyers” with no medical experience, they make the rules!

    I see a discrimination suit pending …

    Fear of Second Hand smoke is a product of Schizophrenia and Illiteracy. This (second hand smoke BS) Argument is touted by people who don’t understand chemical analysis in PPB or MCLs, But think they have knowledge! Drink Your Tap Water, FOOLS! Enjoy the Sewage and Heavy Metals. OH, and Enjoy the Fukushima Cesium, You godforsaken fools!!! Women … don’t get pregnant! Radiation is really bad for developing fetuses. They won’t monitor for Radiation in the Food, but they are Warning about Second Hand Smoke!!! IF only they had Brains! Hey, do your homework … radiation in Milk and Water has spiked in the US. At least I know what’s in a cigarette!

  142. monkeyman says:

    Guess they won’t want quee.. I mean “gays” either or fat folks or sky divers those who eat sugar or doughnuts like bacon.

  143. dontchoke says:

    This is the result of left and progressive policies that defer to the central power structure of social engineering academics to determine how we should live and what we should think.

    So who really represents fascism, intolerance, tramples liberty, and basks in special privileges with cronies and oligarchs that pay to play and submit to their intimidation and blackmail?

  144. fonzi says:

    You CAN’T hire smokers but you CAN hire illegals…hahaha, only in the USofA

    1. Kevin Pearson says:

      No one said that you can’t hire smokers. Baylor is just saying that choose NOT to hire smokers.

  145. Jan Greenhawk says:

    So, lets see. If you eat candy, no job. If you don’t work out everyday, no job. If you drink no job. If you participate in risky sexual behavior, no job. If you are overweight, no job. If you are too skinny, no job….shall I continue? What WILL we have to tell prospective employers before we get hired?

  146. Spanky says:

    Carbon dioxide is such a dangerous gas that it is now regulated by the EPA!

    I think Baylor should not hire anyone who emits CO2!

  147. The Dude says:

    Ha, who cares. This means absolutely nothing. The nicotine test can be beaten easier than the pot test, depending on how heavy a smoker one is. I am a cigar aficionado, smoke about three a week. I find it absolutely absurd that I could be refused refused employment on that basis alone, but it is what it is. Four to seven days of staying away from all types of nicotine, combined with 30 min to an hour of cardio and heavy water drinking can beat the test.

    1. Kevin Pearson says:

      You think a smoker would be able to go 4 days without nicotine?

      If they did, the result would likely be that they were never go back.

      1. The Dude says:

        As many unemployed as there are, I think that would be motivation enough to quit for at least the four days required in order to beat the test. Next, your average smoker might try to quit for good, but if he’s not totally comitted to quiting he will start again eventually. My post was mainly for those like myself who like the occassional cigar, who would like to know that the test would be easily beatable for us.

  148. Rational says:

    I love it when drug addicts (aka “smokers”) think they have some Constitutional right to a job because they can’t control their addiction. You can’t make up how stupid that is.

    1. The Dude says:

      The report says that any users of nicotine can be refused employment, even casual smokers. Under your definition, you could also call coffee drinkers or those who have an occasional glass of wine “drug users.” Kind of stupid, really. I smoke 2-3 cigars a week, which under AHA guidelines does not represent a significant health risk. If employers want to start creating ridiculous requisites like this, then I will reserve the right to fool them by taking certain measures to beat the tests.

  149. Timuchin says:

    The same financial justification would also apply to hiring gays. They are a high disease vector for HIV and AIDS. Is that going to be addressed next year?

    Different addictions for different folks.

  150. wildbill6996 says:

    Does this apply to TOBACCO smokers ONLY ??????? Will marijuana and crack cocaine still be OK ????

  151. Susan says:

    MOST illness these days is SELF INDUCED, People who will take no interest in staying healthy should face more punitive measures. I’ve pretty much reached my limit of tolerance among my own family members. It all comes do to being lazy.

  152. Craig says:

    I don’t smoke and i think its without question the worst habit on earth. However, it is legal therefore to be denied employment I would think is a violation of discrimination laws.

  153. LeAnn says:

    It’s already hard enough to get a job if you don’t speak spanish, now this. What next…”No we can’t hire you because you’re too fat!”.
    So we have to become anarexic-non-smoking-bilingual-hollywood-glamour-gods to get a job around here? Give me a break! The problem with their plan is once they get all their current smoking employees to stop smoking, they will use their smoke breaks for bathroom breaks to throw up to keep from getting fat…just sayin…

  154. hdfhdh says:

    like the way they can skirt the law when it comes to discrimination you cant discriminate on religious gender orientation but if you drink or smoke, you can be.

  155. sukkubus says:

    Good for Baylor. Quit smoking dummies.
    Ban fatties as well…

    1. j says:

      tax the arrogant at 75 % of their income …. put it to vote … I say .. yay

  156. Ryan Jay E Chesley says:

    I am a smoker… my religion calls for it in times of peace(don’t have to inhale)…what now??

  157. Stephanie Shawn Jasky says:

    Sounds like discrimination to me.

  158. Cindy M says:

    Newsflash: It is possible to quit smoking. My hubby was a heavy smoker since his tour in Vietnam, but finally, at age 57, he quit. So can you. Besides, if we MUST live with Obamacare, Baylor won’t be the only company doing this.
    Hey, guess what, Liberals, be careful what you wish for.

  159. keith wren says:

    This certainly is not news… Some Corporations have had a none smoker policy for years

  160. BigTexKahuna says:

    Simple… quit smoking! Trouble is… most of you who do smoke aren’t mentally tough enough to quit. Many of you have tried… yet you fail… time after time… again and again. Weaklings!

    1. j says:

      Next time you pass a biker bar , hows about ya pull in and go tell them that face to face , tuff guy . Pathetic . I’m amazed at the arrogance of peoples comments in an online setting . I guess people like you throw the first stone … when in a crowd

      1. Jose Garcia says:


        Smokers are not the only people in the world with rights. Employers have rights too!

  161. You are next! says:

    Like other tyrannies, the tyranny of the majority was at first, and is still vulgarly, held in dread, chiefly as operating through the acts of the public authorities. But reflecting persons perceived that when society is itself the tyrant — society collectively over the separate individuals who compose it — its means of tyrannizing are not restricted to the acts which it may do by the hands of its political functionaries. Society can and does execute its own mandates; and if it issues wrong mandates instead of right, or any mandates at all in things with which it ought not to meddle, it practices a social tyranny more formidable than many kinds of political oppression, since, though not usually upheld by such extreme penalties, it leaves fewer means of escape, penetrating much more deeply into the details of life, and enslaving the soul itself. Protection, therefore, against the tyranny of the magistrate is not enough; there needs protection also against the tyranny of the prevailing opinion and feeling, against the tendency of society to impose, by other means than civil penalties, its own ideas and practices as rules of conduct on those who dissent from them; to fetter the development and, if possible, prevent the formation of any individuality not in harmony with its ways, and compel all characters to fashion themselves upon the model of its own. There is a limit to the legitimate interference of collective opinion with individual independence; and to find that limit, and maintain it against encroachment, is as indispensable to a good condition of human affairs as protection against political despotism. — John Stuart Mill.

  162. You are next! says:

    Let’s see…I wonder how many of these executives drink booze? How many of them eat red meat each and every day? I suppose they don’t know red and processed meats cause all kinds of cancers? Hhhhhmmm.

    There really is nothing more annoying than a self righteous moral busybody with a HUGE set of double standards.

  163. sylvie says:

    How disgusting. Baylor wants to cling to some moral high ground here? It is not against the law to smoke, yet. Don’t get your panties in a wad! Pray do tell us how much weight you can be allowed to carry, or if your diabetic what are the possibilities of employment there… oh yea, is drinking alcoholic beverages okay or is their a limit? How about how old the person is? If they are young they will probably have kids, that’ will cost, and if their old, you bet that will cost. So what do you want? Someone between the ages of 30 and 40, that will never smoke, drink, be overweight, or want kids. Good luck with that!

  164. Ryan Mouk says:

    Thanks God we have discrimination laws in America or this would be sad, but then again this is America………

  165. Harold E Vincent says:

    I may be mistaken here (though I don’t think) that Baylor has in the past supported legalization of marijuana? What do they propose then? That potheads use the artifically derived version in luquid or capsule?

  166. TJ1 says:

    Well, at least it’s not government telling you what to do. Instead, this is grass roots change being affected by people who have a direct stake in the change. This is an independent business. Let people be free to decide the kind of liability that they want to impose on themselves when they hire their own employees.

    To those who might say, “wait, they receive federal money” (I don’t know if they do, but of course there are industries out there that receive subsidies), So what? If we as a society have decided to subsidize an industry, but now as a society hypothetically want to influence things, whatever they might be, then we can take away the subsidy. Let’s for once try to have true democracy.

    Unfortunately, the real problem is that our politicians don’t seem to want to do what we tell them..

    In that case, apparently all discussions about public policy are moot and a waste of time since the government has long since been corrupted by corporate/political cronyism.

    In all things we must strive to separate the perception that a system is not working with the situation where certain people aren’t allowing the system to work as intended. Our financial system, our government, it’s all a big racket until we have had enough.

  167. Steve says:

    Smoking is a choice. If you want to work there, you could simply choose, as MILLIONS of Americans already have, to QUIT SMOKING. All companies should adopt this policy. We should ban tobacco use for welfare recipients while we’re at it so taxpayers aren’t stuck funding people’s nasty, disgusting habits.

  168. Lee Yarbrough says:

    Is this same company gong to make a rule about hiring overweight people?

    I want to see that one hold up.

    Overweight people are costing American’s Billions and no one taxes them extra for being fat. You smoke and you pay extra taxes.

    Let the games begin.

    As an employer I feel he has the right to do what works for their company and the costs of running that company but either go all the way or not at all. Bet they don’t have the guts to “Say no to fat”. 😉

  169. Jim says:

    What about fat people?

  170. enoughAlready911 says:

    I don’t hire smokers for an entirely different reason:

    Too many smokers EXPECT smoke breaks…they spend 15-20 minutes on each break.

    The rest of my staff don’t take breaks(other than restroom or grab a coffee for about 5 minutes) and have to pick up the slack for the “slackers”. Most smokers think its their RIGHT to walk away no matter how swamped to get their “fix”. When things are at their worst they are jones’ing for the cigs the most.

    This self absorbed attitude then flows into their work product when they return….they seem to pace themselves instead of giving it all they have like the rest of the staff.

    So forget the political correctness, forget the busybodies who think they need to dictate your health, I just don’t hire you because you are not as productive of an employee. ps…I know I am generalizing but on the whole its accurate.

    1. j.sabia says:

      If you wont let them smoke at their job/desk … then isnt it you who makes them take a break

      1. Kevin Pearson says:

        That would only work if the desk was moved outdoors so that the smoke and the foul stench of the smoking employee doesn’t effect the rest of the office.

        Really, if a client comes into an office and the whole facility stinks to high heaven because of some mentally defective worker who doesn’t have enough sense not to work. Better off without them on the payroll at all.

  171. Jimbo says:

    You have the right to smoke. They have the right to not hire you. You have the right to take your business elsewhere.

  172. pitter43 says:

    This is the kind of $hit the traitor obama wanted. Here it is. He’s sending America down the drain a little at a time, in giant steps.

  173. jeffm0518 says:

    One of the things I haven’t read anyone talking about is the amount of wasted time businesses loose when they have smokers working for them. Every company I have ever been with has employees who smoke. Every last one of them would “sneak out” for a quick smoke. In almost every instance, it was NEVER quick. One of the biggest financial calculations they are making I’m sure is the productivity lost when employing people who smoke versus non smokers. They are a business and have the right to hire whoever they want. We as consumers have the right to support the businesses we like and agree with the way they run their companies. If you don’t like it, don’t get treatment there. If you do support them, then support them by going there for treatment. It’s not rocket science.

    1. PitChiK says:

      I know the smokers you speak of, however, not all smokers lack work ethic. I see just as many non-smokers sneaking off while at work as smokers, especially with young workers who have ZERO work ethic. Non-smokers are just better at hiding when they’re not working while on the clock.

    2. j .sabia says:

      Jeez , if I see this as an example again …

      The government created this ‘ smoke break ‘ as you say . How old are you ? Do you remember before the smoking bans ?

  174. Nicholas Bozman says:

    A couple of centuries ago it was socially acceptable to be a christian, own slaves, and carry a gun into a school when you pick up your kids. Today none of those things are valid.

    Smoking cigarettes and being fat are in the transition from social norms to social scorns; like slave ownership, being a christian or person of faith, and carrying firearms into schools while picking up the kids. Its only a matter of time before its illegal for us to be either fat or smokers; because society knows whats best.

    Its just what’s hip right now – hating on fatty and butt suckers.

  175. Mimi44 says:

    We should not be angry with employers just because the insurance company they use costs them more for people who smoke. The fault lies with the insurance companies and then the scientiests that did the studies into smoking cigarettes which gave reports of their findings, whether they be true or false, no one but they will ever really know. With all of the toxic fumes that vehicles are spewing out, it is no wonder that people are having respiratory problems. I would say that the oils in those fumes are probably inflaming people’s lungs and bringing about other unnatural symptoms as a result.

    1. Eric Foster says:

      Wrong. Baylor’s huge. I seriously doubt they are fully insured. The self-funded employer is concerned with their administrative costs, which have little to do with the actual health of the population, and their claims which are passed directly to them as their people utilize medical care. You can blame insurers for a lot of things, but not this.

  176. Eric Foster says:

    Baylor government. You’re free to smoke, but the exercise of that freedom makes you ineligible for unemployment at this private institution. The above, horrible straw arguments against other high risk cost drivers largely aren’t willful decisions; tobacco use is. And health care costs for the employee aren’t the only issue. Presenteeism, absenteeism and health care costs to the smokers’ family members that are covered by Baylor are all considerations, never mind the fact that the probability of a smoker’s dependents being or becoming smokers is far higher than for a non-smoker.

    There are regulations that keep Baylor from putting a substantial contribution burden against their tobacco-using population, so the easiest way to combat the issue is to bar them from employment. I would assume that Baylor employs a wellness plan in which their new hires are required to participate, which gives them a verification method and actionable information on the health of their population.

    No one’s putting a gun to your head to work for Baylor. If you don’t like their rules, you don’t want to be their employee in the first place. There are plenty of paternalistic, aloof employers that you can go to which will let you choose to do things that will run up their costs and destroy your total compensation as their premiums explode.

    1. Eric Foster says:

      Make that, “Baylor is not equal to government.” CBS must not like greater than and less than signs.

      1. j sabia says:

        ” paternalistic, aloof employers ” What a snob you are , sir .

        I know people who smoke and dont get sick or not anymore than anyone else . Many times if they do get sick from smoking, a company like that will have downsized them by that time anyway . Smoking dosent make you sick today . Like anything else in life that will get around to killing you …. it’s much later on . We’re all gonna die of something . What difference dose it make if ya die of lung cancer , colon cancer [ meat eaters ] , skin cancer [ sun bathers / outdoors rec ] , cancer of this or that or whatever . And really , if smokers were droping dead left and right … wouldnt it be cheaper now than years from now . Theyre saving you money … and with all the taxes paid by tobacco users , mfg’ers , growers , distributers , wholesalers etc … if it were made illegal than the government will raise your taxes to make up the difference . Many billions comming out of all you non smokers walletts .Put yer mouth on an exhaust pipe while an engine is running … how long you gonna last … 5 seconds ? You dont think youre breathing that stuff in ? There’s your answer for people who dont smoke getting lung cancer … not second hand smoke … which was just a ploy by the government to coerce more money from the tobacco industry .

  177. mark says:

    Since the health risks to gay men are FAR higher than straights, can we start excluding them from hiring too?

    1. Liberty says:

      Unfortunately Mark, the people we elected made gay men a protected class.

      You are correct. Gay men engage in much riskier conduct than a smoker. Unfortunately political correctness runs rampant in this country.

      Contracting AIDS or engaging in other high risk sexual activity is protected. Smoking is not.

  178. PitChiK says:

    1) Yes Baylor has the right to not hire any non-protected group they want; however, I want to know how they are going to enforce this. My house smells of tobacco constantly, not because my husband and I smoke in here but because they people in the unit behind mine do and their smoke comes into our home through the shared water pipes.
    2) If you don’t want to hire smokers, a small percentage of the population, then why not not hiring obese people? I believe obesity may cost way more than tobacco use.
    3) Not all smokers are inconsiderate jerks that hang out in front of doors. When the desire to smoke hits me, which it does, I do NOT smoke in front of exits, and will step back to a low traffic area. I do NOT like walkin in and out of a building that people are smoking in front of the doors, even when I was smoking all the time.
    4) Stop blaming Obama for a business’s BUSINESS decision.

    1. Eric Foster says:

      PitChik, verification is done via cotinine testing, a chemical that is metabolized when nicotine is broken down. Depending on the test – normally a venapuncture blood draw as part of a wellness screening – it can pick up tobacco use within 3-7 days after use. And if you look on Baylor’s site, you’ll see they do have a wellness benefit.

      As for not hiring the obese, that’s something that can be done in the interview process much easier than not hiring a smoker, assuming the interviewer isn’t blind.

  179. Boo says:

    I have a better reason not to hire a smoker. They take twice as many breaks as non-smokers. My window at work over looks our smoking area and I can’t believe how long and how many times some people are out there.

    1. j sabia says:

      If they could smoke inside [w/ filtration] .. bet ya dont remember those … then they could work w/ out a break and be happier and more productive ….. but people like you make them go outside . Why wouldnt they take their time

    2. PitChiK says:

      The only people I know of that take twice as many breaks as “non-smokers” are those with zero work ethic. That goes for both smokers and non-smokers. Most people today want to do as little work as they can for as much pay as possible. This includes taking extra long breaks. I suggest that you start enforcing your break time policy. By law a person has to have a 15 minute break for every 4 hours worked and a 30 minute lunch for every 6+ hours worked. So for an 8 hour shift that would be 2 15 minute breaks a 30 minute lunch break. If you have employees not adhering to your break and lunch policy, maybe they shouldn’t be working for you.

  180. Muscovite says:

    No problem smokers, just do like Barry does if you want to work there…LIE! Tell them you never smoked or that you have quit. No worries!

  181. corey says:

    This is nothing new – smokers are discriminated against more and more as the days go by. I was a smoker for roughly 10-12 years and I know firsthand the actions employers take concerning tobacco use. It’s considered a dirty habit that has no place in the modern workplace, and you might as well be a leper, because management wants you nowhere near their business when you smoke.

    Smoking is terrible for you, but if you choose to smoke, that’s your business and no one else.

  182. Bruce_Almty says:

    Smokers, Fat people, Jews and Blacks need not apply @ Baylor. How’s that affirmative Action working???

    1. Jose Garcia says:

      How exactly is smoking related to uncontrollable factors, like race and ethnicity?

  183. john s says:

    Smokers cost the U.S. 200 billion .. really . Sure . How much money do smokers pay in taxes a year . It’s probably higer than 20 billion went you take in a smokers income tax , plus all the taxes on tobacco . when thinking tobacco taxes … it’s not just the end user paying taxes . It’ the wholesalers , distributers , mfg’ers , farmers etc …. tobacco generates a heck of a lot more than the 200billion they ” cost ” . If tobacco shortens your life ….. isnt it better these people check out early compared to later . It would be more expensive later . SDmoking gets around to killing people in their ater years when a good number of those workers are getting ready to retire or are retired . Last month , the EPA came out and said something to the effect , that …. in order for a officxe building floor / office [ i forget sq ft ] to have a harmfull affect from smoking … there would have to be 2,200 [ or some such # ] people smoking all day for the air to become unsafe . This mind you is for and average size office setting . If Americans cant see that the Government used whatever b .s. they could to coerce money from tobacco companys and raise taxes on the tobacco products , then you get what you deserve . Let me know what you enjoy ….. at some point they;ll make a devil outta it … and come after your money . i wish there was a tax on anti American / free market thinking . Then the other side would know what it’s like to be a pipe smoker in America . Long live Middletons Cherry Blend . Plus ….. who cares about 200 billion . I lost count after this administration had 7 trillion dollars printed . Get over yer selves people

  184. tellthetruth says:

    How nice that the nanny state and the socialists have had this victory…… for the rest of us………my god…why would we want to work for Baylor…what’s next? Perhaps they will decide that the fat, fat, fatties shouldn’t eat bread and if you eat bread…no job for you!! What people eat and what habits they have in their personal lives are NOT any of Baylor’s or the government’s business!!!

    1. Kevin Pearson says:

      Uh. what are you talking about? The socialists ARE the smokers. Cigarettes are a gateway drug to socialized medicine.

      This is one way of Baylor saying that they are eradicated their staff of liberals who would launder their salary into political contribution to the regime and other Democrats.

  185. Easy Eddie says:

    Smoking is still %100 optional if you want a job at Baylor health services bad enough, don’t smoke, plain and simple. And if you do, conceal it! Don’t make distant extrapolations that if your in a high risk group like: being gay or a female prone to breast cancer that your going to be excluded at your next job interview. (Your legally protected from discrimination so your points are probably null) Plus if you quit smoking its just a good thing at any rate. Who can debate that!!!! No wonder America is dying can’t even stay on topic during debate. Last thing we need is more whiners so government can tell a private business who they can and cant hire. Its just smoking for crying out loud.

  186. joe says:

    that’s good information.. that means I cane effectively discriminate and not hire democrat’s!!!

  187. Ben Diamante says:

    The thing we should all take away from this is that whenever someone has a financial interest in our health then they will try, by whatever means necessary, to modify your behavior and make decisions for you. So now, we have Obamacare, which means the federal government has a financial interest in your health. Oh great.

  188. Real Rick says:

    Being in business many years, I’ve seen too many employees that take extra long breaks to smoke, sneak out back to smoke, etc, etc. For years now, I keep an ashtray in a desk drawer with some ash and a couple of butts. When someone comes in for a job, I put it on my desk. Most smokers get a smile on their faces when they see it and light up. After the interview their resume goes in the trash. Period.

    1. Tar Heel Terry says:

      I was in small business for many years, too, and had a far different experience. Anectdotaly, I found my smokers to be far more creative and productive than my non-smokers. And less inclined to phone in for three days of sick leave with the sniffles. I’m not a smoker. My prime concern was what they brought to the company.

  189. rlwieneke says:

    You have a right to smoke a cigarette, but you don’t have a right to work at Baylor.

    ““We all have the right to smoke a cigarette,” Grooms said in disagreement.”

  190. Zul says:

    How the hell did people go from smoking to – gay? Honestly, smoking should be banned, as well as alcohol. Both lead to nothing but problems. For yourself, and those around you. Stop denying this fact.

    1. dummy says:

      Comments from Zul should be banned. They lead to nothing but problems. For yourself, and others around you. Stop denying this fact!

  191. Ken says:

    Why can’t the employer look for employee insurance that does not pay for smoking caused medical conditions? It is just like not paying for our personal auto insurance.

  192. Bill says:

    UNFAIR? YES! Hey you child care, welfare, or just plain “its all abiout me” people out there. LIFE IS UNFAIR. Get used to it. Entities can hire anyone they want. Smokers burn one? No more if you want to work.

  193. Man From Oz says:

    Next it will be if you are overweight they won’t hire you! Diabetes and heart disease kills more women than breast cancer and kills more men than prostate cancer. This is opening Pandora’s Box!

    1. Tar Heel Terry says:

      True. And the justifications seem to be drifting between the financial and the moral. Smokers won’t be hired because of their potential costs to our health benefits program. But using the financial-only logic, women shouldn’t be hired by Baylor either since they will probably cost the Company more over their working lives in terms woman-specific health needs and lost time from maternity leaves. It really is a Pandora’s Box once you start to head down that road.

  194. A Lil Wacked says:

    Ok.. ban smokers from working on a health care campus.. then you have to do the same to alcoholics, drug users, and obese people, pedophiles, etc… all unhealthy lifestyles… If you don’t think other people can be equally as much of a drain on the health care system or on a staff.. think again… obese people have their own set of health issues… diabetes, leg, back and knee pain, breathing problems.. furniture problems, heart and stroke risks.. they’re just as much an issue..

  195. M. King says:

    It is apparent that the attorney speaking is not to bright. When the employer makes the statment that they are not hiring or discriminating against tobacco users due to MEDICAL costs – tobacco use IS a medical issue. If tobacco use is a medical issue – then it IS by a veriety of laws prohibiting discrimination based on a medical condition that does not interfere with the employees ability to do their job. It is also ten covered by HIPAA and protected from disclosure….

  196. Scott says:

    This will touch every one of us before it’s all over with; wait and see. Before you jump on the bandwagon to condemn smokers (which I am not one, by the way), you might want to consider that if you are overweight, have a genetic condition or develop a condition, have kids who cause you to miss work, get migraines, drink alcohol….it’s coming. This is just another opportunity to claim one thing to gain another. Big brother is coming to your doorstep and stepping inside the door soon. My advice is to speak up NOW before it reaches you.

  197. BIGSPANK says:

    Here is what drives up health care costs. Thirty buildings full of administrative types who contribute NOTHING to making a person well, all earning more than twenty five thousand dollars a year including health care, and retirement plans. Smokers contribute a NEED for health care. This anti smoker issue is just some elitists pushing their agenda!

  198. Marybell says:

    Wake up Americans. If this guy wins in 2012. There will never be another election in ths country. Just think about it. Get your crayolas out and color America gone.. .We must not let that happen.

  199. deez2020 says:

    What if you use an electronic cigarette. It only contains nicotine. It doesn;t burn, doesn’t smell and has none of the other 80 plus carcinogens that are in traditional cigs. I bet that won’t be good enough for them.

  200. deez2020 says:

    Can we still eat twinkies?

  201. RN2 says:

    Baylor also punishes those employees who chose to not get a flu shot and they punish people who don’t get “well doctor’s visits”. If you or your spouse smoke, it cost 600.00 a year per smoker, taken out of your check.

    This is a slippery slope. Just how much control should any employer have over the off work hour and personal choices of it’s employees. Also, if you have to turn in alll this information on these health related topics, where does HIPPA apply to hospital employees, the same who are given the sacred job of protecting the HIPPA rights of patients?

  202. zedster says:

    I find people in the medical field who have taken an oath to help the sick and promote health and wellness, that smell like an ash tray when they profess
    in my presence, fowl and repulsive.

  203. steve says:

    If there is going to be a list, let the fat people get fired fist. They have more health problems than smokers.Then lets keep track of the adult beverages via anklet.
    The whole idea of social reconstruction and management knows no boundary and
    could not care less about the trillions of dollars wasted on these programs but is worried about my insurance policy that I pay for. I suggest liberals wake up and realize they are living in this world and not reading some novel.

  204. dummy says:

    1. Doctors kill more people each year than smoking.
    2. The longer you live, the average cost to society will be higher.
    3. Smoking decreases the medical costs for society over any 100 year period.
    4. Smokers on average do not miss more work than others of same educational background.
    5. Others dictating what legal activities you should be allowed to conduct should not be allowed.

    1. Kevin Pearson says:

      uh Dummy you’re wrong not just a dummy

      The bulk of healthcare costs occur in the last few years of life regardless of the lifespan. Smokers however have higher costs throughout their lifespan because they have a lot more complications because of their lifestyle.

  205. Jedd says:

    I have a problem with the Federal (or even State) government telling restaurant owners, for instance, that they can’t have smoking sections, etc. As long as it’s a legal activity the government has no right to impose laws restricting businesses from allowing its’ use.

    On the other hand, I think private employers have every right to hire only non-smokers. Smokers are lazy at worst and less productive than non-smokers at worst and I say this as a former smoker. This November I’ll celebrate my ONE YEAR anniversary of having quit and I’ll never look back.

  206. Dez says:

    It’s nice to see all you raging libertarians sticking together!

    1. Eric says:

      As a libertarian I have the right to smoke.

      1. Jose Garcia says:

        As a private company Baylor has the right to hire based on personal behavior. Or do you want to be totalitarian and have the government come in and tell a PRIVATE company they must hire you?

  207. Leigh Hardy says:

    Welcome to liberal America.
    You do what we don’t like and we will make certain you are buckled under.

  208. Jose Garcia says:

    Your choice to smoke. Companies choice to hire based on applicant’s behavior. Don’t see a problem at all with this policy. Want to work at Baylor, then don’t smoke. Smoking is a variable completely under your control, unlike all the other variables people are trying to compare it to.

  209. FedUpWithBigGovernment says:

    Hmmm… well I guess if you are a minority… and you smoke… then you will be setup for a nice lawsuit. If they do not hire you.. you can sue them for discrimination. Lets hope the lawyers descend on them like flies on ****. As many have stated on here… those cheering these actions now may be the next ones that are discriminated against with the next restriction.. so WATCH WHAT YOU WISH FOR. Pretty soon it is going to be like Gattica

  210. Mike says:

    I say good for Baylor all these crying I deserve this I deserve that babies. Everyone thinks they can do whatever they want just because. I have for years owned my own business and I never hire a smoker or a fatty. If you think a persons bad habits and how they look and carry themselves doesnt affect the work place and productivity think again. Baylor is one of the finest Cancer hospitals in the country. You think they should condone bad behavior or speak out against it.

  211. Infoczar says:

    What about the President he smokes and drinks.

  212. Bart says:

    Nothing like having a med tech or a nurse or a scan technician who absolutely reeks of cigarette smoke on their breath and clothes to work on you. I’ve gone to the ER for uncontrollable migraines only to have it get worse when some smoker medical person just came in from having their fix. Then there was the time my son had an asthma attack and after 4 hours of treatment, went to the bathroom and had to come in for more treatment because some loser smoker had to have a cig so bad they used the hospital bathroom. I think there’s more to this ban than they’re wanting to say.

  213. M Brown says:

    My employer friend says, “I hire whomever I want to hire and follow Rule #1: ‘NEVER hire anyone you can’t fire at will’.” It’s my company and my responsibility, win or lose. I don’t hire applicants with face hair..unshined hard shoes…caps on backwards … or are IMO customer ugly. My business is successful so far and my employees who are well paid rarely leave. The Federal Government can’t do anything about it because I don’t give those chair-warming little dictators anything on paper. it’s no one else’s business.”

  214. Ruby says:

    Anybody can verify the Fact that nicotine is twice as addictive as heroin and it is a drug. That is a fact. The employer just does not want drug addicts in the workplace.

    1. Sammie Jo says:

      If it’s such a bad drug, then why is it legal? A smoker is not a druggie.

  215. sammie Jo says:

    okay, so let me get this straight.
    Baylor is discriminating against people who engage in a LEGAL activity?
    Baylor has the right to demand that no one smoke on their property, they don’t have the right not to hire a qualified person based on them engaging in a habit that is LEGAL, on their own time.
    You cannot discriminate by gender/color or age, why should you be allowed to discriminate against someone who smokes?
    What next? Every year the “studies” come out with some new food or drink that is supposedly hazerdous to our health, will Baylor not hire coffee drinkers, bacon eaters, fondue dippers? Where does it end?
    Before everyone gets their panties in a wad, I am NOT a smoker, nor have I ever been a smoker and I have no intention of taking up the habit.

  216. robster says:

    If they we’re really concerned about the cost, they’d not hire fat people or those with obvious heath problems (unless it was a politically correct health problem or risk). I wouldn’t work for an organization like this; I think management has issues, control issues.

  217. OhioStateRob says:

    Isn’t smoking a pre-existing condition? If it is not LEGAL under Obamacare to deny coverage due to pre-existing conditions, how can it be LEGAL to deny someone employment??

  218. ranch111 says:

    I think everyone can agree that smokers and the obese should not get employer healthcare benefits. They cost us enormous amounts of money in healthcare costs every year. They are a drag on the rest of us that try to stay healthy. Pay for your own healthcare if you smoke or are obese, and let the non-smokers and non-obese people keep their benefits. Maybe that will force these people to see the light.

  219. DougPete says:

    I read a statistic a few years ago that smokers have about $300,000 in health care costs during their lifetime while non-smokers have $450,00. Why? Because smokers tend to die younger. Wish I still had the attribution for this statistic.

  220. gymlock says:

    Rising health care costs began being the problem they are today when employers substituted health insurance for higher wages. Providers saw the light that provided and began raising fees in the direction of those companies. It’s out of control. To not hire nicotine users is a good first step in the right direction. Obama wrote about the ‘poor woman’ who couldn’t afford health insurance and died of breast cancer. The truth is, she couldn’t afford the only policy available to her in Missouri which also covered podiatrists, dentists, unlimited hospital stays for pregnant women and newborns, chiropractors, prostate screenings and numerous other services she didn’t need. She couldn’t get a policy suited to her needs like we can get for our cars; she also couldn’t go across the river and get a policy in Illinois or any other state because Congress refuses to allow competition among health insurers. Smokers develop emphysema, coronary artery disease, peripheral vascular disease, and have higher incidences of strokes, heart attacks, and other disease processes. This company is just protecting itself.

  221. Rico says:

    Being in a “free country” means they can, and should hire whoever the frell they want.

  222. Clara Garvey says:

    This is their business. As a HEALTH network, they have every right to choose employees who put their health first. I am a nursing student, and I have NO problem with marijuana, smoking, copious amounts of alcohol, or whatever you want to do in your own home. However, I realize that my future employee might want a nurse who is free from habits that might harm my health or alter my judgement, so I gladly abstain. It is their right to hire who they want. If you want to be hired by them, then comply, or quit complaining and find someone else to work for.

    1. Clara Garvey says:


  223. Tony says:

    ” Baylor officials claim smoking has a lot to do with the high cost of health care. The FDA estimates smoking costs American employers some $200 billion a year in lost productivity and increased medical costs.”
    The excuse listed above is a FALSE claim. The FDA’s motives for their estimate is absolutely self serving and not based on fact at all. They use a false method of calculation to come up with this estimate figure to justify requests for budget increases and additional studies and programs in order to expand their role in government and further insure their necessity, and thus jobs. Its a crock. Thats why you will never see a genuine breakdown of the real costs which could be disputed. Its like Polls. You can make them end up saying what ever you want by the questions you ask.

  224. hillcoguy says:

    Like 0’bammy said: “Time to put on your marching shoes and go take it!”

  225. Rick says:

    This trend has been present for some time in law enforcement. Many departments will not hire you if you smoke. However, they cannot deny you employment if you are HIV positive because they are protected by the Americans with Disability Act, and AIDS has become a “political” illness.” Consider that as a society we have reached a point where your vice has to have a lobbyist! We are witnessing the decline and end of reason. And for the record, I do not smoke.

  226. Corners says:

    What about fatties? Fatties will cost the system more than smokers. Why not just get rid of fatties and smokers. Eventually, they’ll run out of money to buy junk food and cigs, and thus be able to return to work. Win-win.

  227. Pat Rathke says:

    You think that is bad at 5’3″ and 132 lbs I was turned down by Blue Cross of California …..the reason I was deemed to be obese. Don’t you just love it.

    1. PitChiK says:

      What’s sad is I can believe this! 132 lbs at 5’3″ is NOT obese! I’m sorry that you got denied for such ridiculousness. 132 at 5’3″ is not even outside the Army’s weight standards for our troops, so not sure why Blue Cross of California is being so stupid.

  228. Marrabella says:

    If this became general rule for all jobs, I Guess Obama would be out of a job. lol

  229. glen says:

    Well it’s obvious they stopped hireing people with brains the day they hired the policy maker that made this decision.

  230. kmrod says:

    “We all have the right to smoke a cigarette,”

    Yes you do. And a company should have a right to not hire you if you choose to do that.

  231. Keats says:

    I’m so sick of this lame mentality “let the smoker’s die, I don’t have to pay for you.” It’s so Hitler-esque. There is a lot of it, and it’s disturubingly high amongst conservatives. I’m a conservative and I sometimes wish we could purge our ranks of these nutjobs.

    Do you know who we saw mostly in the ER the other day? Kids with sports injuries. Two head injuries, one 8 your old with a broken arm from playing FOOTBALL, a 14 year old girl who got kicked in the ribs iwhile playing with a brace on her leg from a PREVIOUS injury. When someone tells us the cost of SPORTS INJURIES/MEDICINE in this country, then I’ll listen. All of these people blustering “I’m not paying for your bad choices!!” – Well, to be fair apply that to everyone. See who is left. You probably won’t even be among the selected few yourself!

    1. Jim says:

      I’m sure there were many other ‘visitors’ to the ER besides the two sports injuries; and many of them were indigent patients with big screen televisions, cell phones, and a pack of smokes. Baby boomers suffered more that 1 million sports injuries which cost over $18.7 billion Dollars in medical expenses in 1998. Also from 1998: the total cost of caring for people with health problems caused by cigarette smoking — counting all sources of medical payments — is about $72.7 billion per year, according to health economists at the University of California.

      You’re a conservative and I’m a light bulb. The comparison to Hitler is wearing mighty thin from you lying liberals with the lame mentality.

  232. Richard Kimbrough says:

    I don’t smoke nor do i like it but this Company is wrong in descriminating against smokers. If allowed to do this then soon Insurance Companies and othe companies will use this cae as a reason to descriminate

  233. Paul Passarelli says:

    Yes, smokers have a “right” to light up, and the employer has a right not to hire them.

    The “job” belongs to the employer, and if the employer determines that they do not choose to hire workers that have an addiction or compulsion, because they might take time to feed their “desires”, then that is the employers decision!

    If it’s not an addiction then the person should be willing to sacrifice the “need” to smoke to obtain the job. Arguing that you have a right to be addicted to a substance is pretty damn stupid… IMHO.

    The criteria is established be the employer, the decision to adhere is solely on the employee or applicant.

    BTW: I also happen to support the *complete* decriminalization of drugs! The “war on drugs” was lost before it was started and is nothing but a burden on society. Potential druggies beware: With freedom comes responsibility!

  234. gymlock says:

    Having been in management and working to provide coverage to employees – everyone involved needs to realize insurance isn’t free. Cost for health care are added up and divided among the plan participants. Rising health care costs began being the problem they are today when employers substituted health insurance for wages with the gamble the services wouldn’t be used. Providers saw the light that provided and began raising fees in the direction of those companies. It’s out of control. To not hire nicotine users is a step in the right direction. Obama wrote about the ‘poor woman’ who couldn’t afford health insurance and died of breast cancer. The truth is, she couldn’t afford the only policy available to her in Missouri which also covered podiatrists, dentists, unlimited hospital stays for pregnant women and newborns, chiropractors, prostate screenings and numerous other services she didn’t need. She couldn’t get a policy suited to her needs like we can get for our cars; she also couldn’t go across the river and get a policy in Illinois or any other state because Congress refuses to allow competition among health insurers. Smokers develop emphysema, coronary artery disease, peripheral vascular disease, and have higher incidences of strokes, heart attacks, and other disease processes. This company is just protecting itself.

  235. Smith says:

    Everyone who thinks this is an intelligent policy for society better keep their mouth shut when these people end up on welfare eating all your tax money. And you will end up paying their healthcare cost with your tax money as well. This is just cost shifting off one employer onto all the taxpayers.

  236. weepers says:

    This is a slippery slope for Human Individual Rights. People are NOT smoking at work, they are not allowed to. If they do it in their off hours when not being paid by Baylor….how can they demand this legally? I think more leagal work needs to be done here…civil liberatrians!
    Now, what about those that are overweight? That is costing Insurance companies billions when you consider all of the problems that come with obesity…high blood pressure, cancer, diabetes, knee relacements, back problems and so on. What about the employee who goes home and drinks a gallon of gin? Alcoholism causes health problems as well.. What about the person who goes out and has unprotected sex in high risk situations? This causes major problems. This needs to be looked into further…not a smoker and never would be but I hate seeing individual rights being taken away one by one. Watch out Baylor

  237. Viewer4958 says:

    I would think that the well-being of smokers who enter into such health care facilities for treatment (whether or not “smoking related”) would be compromised. The issue of medical error being the leading cause of preventable death aside, surely most of us know how one can be mistreated in a hospital because a staffer could not act with maturity when something extraneous about a patient fails to please him or her on a personal level. It has to be understood that when a smoker seeks services from an organization that would not even hire smokers he/she is entering a hostile environment.

Comments are closed.

More From CBS Dallas / Fort Worth

Drip Pan: CBS Local App
Drip Pan: Weather App

Watch & Listen LIVE