Smoking is bad for your health. On that, we can all agree. It’s been rightly banned in all sorts of public spaces over the last 15 years, from restaurants and bars to workplaces and public parks, stadiums, theaters and elsewhere where people congregate.
And for at least the last decade, some companies have turned away prospective employees who use nicotine products.
Arizona-based U-Haul International, which has 30,000 employees worldwide, is joining the movement next month when a new “wellness” policy kicks in. Starting Feb. 1, the company says it will no longer hire people who use nicotine to work in its stores in Massachusetts and 20 other states where it is legal to have such a policy.
Job applicants will have to disclose whether they smoke, vape or chew nicotine products. Current employees are not subject to the new policy.
This restrictive practice goes beyond the promotion of good health, which companies should be doing anyway, and into the “slippery slope” territory of corporate intrusion over the legal habits of its employees.
U-Haul’s chief of staff, Jessica Lopez, told the Gazette that the health of its workforce is the paramount reason for the policy and is a “responsible step in fostering a culture of wellness at U-Haul.”
Uh-huh. Telling a potential employee, “thanks, but no thanks” because they smoke doesn’t actually improve anyone’s health. Encouraging nicotine users, both longtime and new employees, to participate in nicotine cessation programs might reach the same goal — and invite qualified workers into the fold at a time when the worker pool is small.
U-Haul’s ban is not quite as altruistic as helping employees on their “health journey.” The company is likely betting the move will save it money. A 2013 Ohio State University study estimated that workers who smoke cost employers an average of about $5,800 a year, mainly because of productivity lost to smoking breaks and increased sick time. That was seven years ago, so the figure is probably higher by now.
It’s understandable why a business would look at ways to ensure that its employees are healthy and show up to work. But refusing to hire a nicotine user is a step in the wrong direction, especially when there are all sorts of other unhealthy behaviors it could target.
What about people who are obese? Will they be turned away for drinking sugary drinks or eating high-calorie lunches? Will employees who don’t exercise or engage in legal and dangerous activities in their personal time be targeted next?
All of these things affect a person’s health, not just smoking.
Some of the largest employers in the Valley — the University of Massachusetts, Baystate Health, Cooley Dickinson Hospital and others — hire smokers. Cooley Dickinson stopped screening for nicotine and tobacco use at the time of hire in 2015 for a variety of reasons. Officials didn’t want to lose out on potential great employees due to such use, and they wanted to have an inclusive and diverse workforce.
Woodstar Cafe’s co-owner Rebecca Robbins said her business would never bar nicotine users from employment, noting that such a move would shrink the hiring pool without guaranteeing any cost savings.
“We have all kinds of people on our staff, and some have healthy habits and they’re sick frequently and vice-versa,” she said.
U-Haul’s policy isn’t new, but it is still rare enough to generate debate. While we know that tobacco use is a health hazard that comes with high health care costs, the bottom line is that smoking is a legal activity.
Companies should continue to invest — and invest more — in programs that help their employees and would-be employees lead healthier lifestyles in a positive way.