Don't expect a job if you smoke

Baron von Lotsov · 25-09-2007, 08:15 PM

A bit of real life for you rather than what the papers & BBC tell you.

Quote

Dear Denys,

Thank you for your reply.

Kalamazoo-Reynolds has a very strict non smoking policy in place which prevents us from employing smokers. As you are currently a smoker I'm afraid I will not be able to proceed any further with your application.

I would like to thank you for your interest in Kalamazoo-Reynolds and wish you every success in the future.

Kind Regards
===============================================

How kind is that?

B.A.Ware · 25-09-2007, 09:28 PM

How long will it be before these fascists can discriminate on weight and drinking habits

NickIrons · 26-09-2007, 01:15 AM

Doesn't sound right, there can be no reason why a smoker
can be rejected on that fact alone, and be given a written
reply stating so, would be tribunal suicide.
Sounds like b*******s to me.

Britannist · 26-09-2007, 04:14 AM

This article on the website of Forest (the smokers' rights campaigning group) may be of interest:

How to put together a smoking policy for the workplace:

Employers: Smoking in the Office

Forest home page:

FOREST Online Home Page

Britannist · 26-09-2007, 04:21 AM

The impressive Forest website is worth a visit (Forest is the smokers' rights campaigning group):

FOREST Online Home Page

youcanhandlethetruth · 26-09-2007, 04:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Britannist

The impressive Forest website is worth a visit (Forest is the smokers' rights campaigning group):

FOREST Online Home Page

It's the new world order folks........
You see how the new world order want to micromanage our lives ?

Check out this article.........

Today's Anti-Smoking Purge Is Borrowed From The Nazis

Little Englander (sour) · 26-09-2007, 10:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by B.A.Ware

How long will it be before these fascists can discriminate on weight and drinking habits

You'll be alright if you're over weight in Kilos and drink too much in litres.

Miliband wants freedom for Burma but chains for England.

Tara · 26-09-2007, 02:53 PM

Whether this account is true or not I do agree the New World Order state is behind such things in order to control every aspect of our pathetic lives. I have to say I used to resent my smoking colleagues as they used to take so many breaks throughout the day on top of their regular lunch and coffee ones, at the end of the month it adds up to a few extra hours but then I got my own back with regular sickies, so I can see why people would now object to working with smokers. In every other aspect though I do understand and support smokers rights to smoke in public and I know non smokers like myself are up for the chop tomorrow over something equally puerile.

Revolution anyone? I've got a pea shooter.

Little Englander (sour) · 26-09-2007, 04:07 PM

You're ever so right but now when they come for you, you have lost the support of foxhunters and smokers for a start, I guess anglers next.

They came for the redheads and because I wasn't a redhead it didn't bother me ...

Baron von Lotsov · 26-09-2007, 09:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NickIrons

Doesn't sound right, there can be no reason why a smoker
can be rejected on that fact alone, and be given a written
reply stating so, would be tribunal suicide.
Sounds like b*******s to me.

You would be amazed at what companies getaway with. You might know this, I do as well, but how many of the public know their legal rights? The chap who originally posted this is a moderator on some other forum. He seems genuine to me and so does the letter. You can often spot fakes with a bit of experience, this is genuine robot buggy data output from the system. You couldn't make it up.

25-09-2007, 08:15 PM	#1 (permalink)
Baron von Lotsov Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 963	Don't expect a job if you smoke A bit of real life for you rather than what the papers & BBC tell you. Quote Dear Denys, Thank you for your reply. Kalamazoo-Reynolds has a very strict non smoking policy in place which prevents us from employing smokers. As you are currently a smoker I'm afraid I will not be able to proceed any further with your application. I would like to thank you for your interest in Kalamazoo-Reynolds and wish you every success in the future. Kind Regards =============================================== How kind is that?

25-09-2007, 09:28 PM	#2 (permalink)
B.A.Ware Moderator Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Birmingham Posts: 4,301 Party: UKIP	How long will it be before these fascists can discriminate on weight and drinking habits __________________ We’re not just about Europe.

26-09-2007, 04:14 AM	#4 (permalink)
Britannist Uber Member Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: London Posts: 22,896	Forest, smokers' rights campaigning group This article on the website of Forest (the smokers' rights campaigning group) may be of interest: How to put together a smoking policy for the workplace: Employers: Smoking in the Office Forest home page: FOREST Online Home Page

26-09-2007, 04:21 AM	#5 (permalink)
Britannist Uber Member Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: London Posts: 22,896	Forest website, smokers' rights group The impressive Forest website is worth a visit (Forest is the smokers' rights campaigning group): FOREST Online Home Page

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

26-09-2007, 01:15 AM	#3 (permalink)
NickIrons Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Bienne, Switzerland Posts: 479	Doesn't sound right, there can be no reason why a smoker can be rejected on that fact alone, and be given a written reply stating so, would be tribunal suicide. Sounds like b*******s to me.

26-09-2007, 02:53 PM	#8 (permalink)
Tara Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 818	Whether this account is true or not I do agree the New World Order state is behind such things in order to control every aspect of our pathetic lives. I have to say I used to resent my smoking colleagues as they used to take so many breaks throughout the day on top of their regular lunch and coffee ones, at the end of the month it adds up to a few extra hours but then I got my own back with regular sickies, so I can see why people would now object to working with smokers. In every other aspect though I do understand and support smokers rights to smoke in public and I know non smokers like myself are up for the chop tomorrow over something equally puerile. Revolution anyone? I've got a pea shooter.

26-09-2007, 04:07 PM	#9 (permalink)
Little Englander (sour) Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Portsmouth Posts: 880 Party: English Democrats	You're ever so right but now when they come for you, you have lost the support of foxhunters and smokers for a start, I guess anglers next. They came for the redheads and because I wasn't a redhead it didn't bother me ...