Here you go:
October 03, 2004
The Sunday Times
Job vacant ... but not for smokers
by Sarah-Kate Templeton and Nina Goswami
BRITISH companies have started to refuse to employ smokers, even if they promise not to indulge their habit during working hours.
Scores of businesses have introduced the ban to cut down on time wasted by staff going outside smoke-free buildings for cigarette breaks. They also want to reduce the littering of their entrances with butts.
Employers that have introduced the bans include computer companies, accountants and other professionals such as art dealers. They claim employees who smell of smoke are off-putting to clients, while those who promise to confine their smoking to outside working hours rarely do so.
The zero-tolerance policy has been prompted by growing concern over the health risks and moves towards curbs on smoking in public places.
“It is still rare for employers to specifically request non-smokers but we are seeing more of this,” said Lawrence Carter, head of people strategy at Reed, the recruitment company.
“This is due to changed public perception and awareness of health issues. The initiatives in New York and Dublin (to ban smoking in public places) have also had an impact.”
Companies in Britain that have implemented a ban include Kalamazoo-UCS, a Texan software company that employs 400 people at its premises in Northfield, Birmingham. It refuses to hire people who smoke and a job advert for a computer programmer at the site warns: “Kalamazoo hires non-smokers only.”
Kershen-Fairfax, a London accountancy firm with about
20 staff, does not employ any smokers. The firm is currently advertising for a trainee accountant and a book-keeper, but smokers need not apply.
Deborah Kershen-Fisher, a partner at the firm, said: “If people went outside to smoke they could be absent from their desks for long periods of time.”
BouncingFish, a London website designer, also decided to ban smokers after a former employee went out for cigarette breaks every half hour. He later left the company.
Jason Kneen, co-founder of BouncingFish, said: “Because he was addicted, he became stressed out and it was affecting his work. His addiction was causing problems with clients.”
Chris Stanbury, managing director of Cravenplan Computers, an IT and website design company in Wiltshire that introduced a ban, said: “People who smoke smell and that is not acceptable if they are dealing with clients. If someone has been smoking in their car and then they are introduced to a client, it is pretty unpleasant.
“I also think, generally, people who smoke are less healthy than people who do not.”
Under British employment law it is illegal to discriminate on the grounds of sex, race, sexual orientation, religion, disability and, from 2006, age. No specific legislation covers smoking. In British Columbia, Canada, courts have accepted that smokers are “disabled” and cannot be discriminated against. But in Britain, nicotine is excluded from the 1995 Disability Discrimination Act.
One legal avenue for smokers would be the 1998 Human Rights Act, which guarantees right to “respect for private and family life”.
However, Katherine de Souza, a partner in employment law at Marriott Harrison, said a claim by a smoker was unlikely to succeed. “There is no law saying employers cannot discriminate against smokers,” she said.
Many organisations, such as Marie Stopes International, the family planning clinic chain, do not ban smokers but give preference to those who shun the habit. A current advert for doctors at the organisation states: “non-smokers preferred”.
Few companies have gone as far as the Berlin-based publisher Woeckel.
Frank Woeckel, the company’s director, said: “We ask applicants if they smoke and what they think about passive smoking and non-smoker protection. Only those who credibly affirm that they are non-smokers have a chance.
“If someone was found to have lied they would immediately be dismissed and the fact that we were deceived would be noted on their work reference.”
John Reid, the health secretary, has confirmed that action will be taken to restrict smoking in public places but has not specified what will be done.
It appears that ministers are backing away from plans to allow local authorities to ban smoking in all workplaces including bars and pubs. The public health white paper due next month is expected instead to permit selective restrictions on smoking in public places.
This will disappoint the medical profession and public health campaigners.
The anti-smoking trend was condemned by Forest, the pro-smoking lobby group. Simon Clark, the director, said: “A no-smoking policy is one thing but why should people be denied jobs because they smoke outside working hours? What next? ‘Thin people preferred’? ‘Non-fatties only’?”
|
Linear Mode
