Read our related editorial: The right to do ourselves harm
BANNING smoking in the office is one thing, but refusing to hire smokers may damage their health and exacerbate social inequalities.
The stopped hiring smokers in 2005, while the US has suggested that the preferential hiring of non-smokers would help to discourage smoking. A handful of US companies has adopted the policy in recent years. 鈥淲e鈥檙e trying to eliminate smoking,鈥� says Michael Roizen, Chief Wellness Officer at the Cleveland Clinic in Ohio, which .
Advertisement
Critics have previously called the policy employment discrimination. Now Brian Houle of the University of Washington in Seattle and of Boston University, have called for a closer examination of its potential health impacts in this week鈥檚 issue of Tobacco Control ().
They could not find any published evaluations of its effect on public health, but identify several ways in which the policy could be damaging.
Smokers might be forced to quit their jobs rather than their habit, they say, which could leave US workers without health insurance. And by preventing smokers from finding work, the policy may also exacerbate social segregation, as smoking is more common among some ethnic minorities and low-income groups.
鈥淩efusing to hire smokers may exacerbate social segregation and lead to a loss of health insurance鈥�
Read our related editorial: The right to do ourselves harm
