Butt out: TN hospital will no longer hire nurses who smoke
The next time you get ready for a pre-employment drug test, remember to stay away from poppy seed bagels. You may also have to make sure you are not a smoker. Beginning in February, Memorial Hospital in Chattanooga, TN will no longer hire potential employees who smoke or test positive for nicotine.
Officials at Memorial Hospital believe hospitals need to set a healthy example for the community, and think not hiring smokers is a step in the right direction.
However, not everyone agrees with Memorial Hospital. If you do not hire potential employees because they smoke and are not setting a good example, then should you not hire obese individuals, or those who do not eat right, or exercise?
What are your thoughts? Do you think not hiring smokers is beneficial to the recovery of patients? Is this the right way for hospitals to be setting an example to the surrounding community?
About the Author: Sarah is an Editorial Assistant in the patient safety group at HCPro, Inc. She contributes to two monthly newsletters; Briefings on the Joint Commission and Briefings on Patient Safety, and manages four e-zines; Accreditation Connection, AHAP Staff Challenge, Nurse Manager Weekly, and Healthcare Training Weekly. She also helps research new products for the patient safety and nursing market. She graduated from the University of Connecticut in 2008 where she earned her bachelor's degree in English.
Deb Swan, RN | Jan 21, 2010 | Reply
I agree that smoking is horribly unhealthy. And, we can all benefit from being an appropriate weight and excelling at taking great care of ourselves.
However, also believe that prejudice of any kind in the workplace is unfair. If personal habits do not affect patient care, lifestyle should not be a factor in employment. Why do a drug test for nicotine?…If they cannot tell the potential employee is a smoker by looking at them (or smelling), how would the patients know any different? If the patients do not see the staff smoking, then how could the staff be setting a bad example?
What’s next?…..no hiring of overweight nurses? That would knock out more than half the workforce….!
I think all this has NOTHING with the hospital wanting to set a better example, but a convenient afterthought. It is all about the hospital finding another way to save money. Am assuming their benefit packages will be cheaper to provide if they can claim none of the staff smoke. In that case, the obesity thing WILL be next. It is a another way to provide cheaper insurance. Just my opinion…
John Brady | Jan 21, 2010 | Reply
I think that it is about time that the Health Care Industry takes a stand such as this. I am an OR Nurse and an ex-smoker. Instead of complaining about the negative effects of smoking and second hand smoke let us take responsibility for our actions and enforce what we believe is good for the people that work for Hospitals and their patients.
Tonya Barrere | Jan 22, 2010 | Reply
I do not agree with the hospital’s stance on not hiring those who test positive for nicotine. I would be interested in viewing the “Officials at Memorial Hospital” and noting whether they have normal BMI’s or not. Let’s go a step further and scrutinize their exercise regime and evaluate their blood for elevated cholesterol/triglyceride levels. One could even argue that other moral choices could be challenged for review – such as how much alcohol is consumed weekly by the staff? (all in the name of setting a good example).
This is not about setting an example but about the almighty dollar – let’s at least be truthful. This issues opens a huge can of worms and should not be left in the hands of a few “officials” to decide.
Tauna Barrett | Jan 25, 2010 | Reply
While I agree smoking is a horrible addiction and we would prefer not to hire smokers. As long as it doesn’t interfere with patient care and is kept off campus who are you to place such judgement. You might as well clump every self inflicted unhealthy candidate into the same catagory. You might be suprised what a nursing shortage really looks like!
julie | Jan 25, 2010 | Reply
Smoking, overeating or drinking too much are all ways of ‘coping’ with the pressures of work and life. Working in a hospital is such a stressful environment. Cigarettes and food provide temporary ‘relief’ and serve as a kind of ‘anesthetic’, one that can distract and comfort the individual from their thoughts and emotions. Unfortunately, it is of course a short lived relief and the ‘problem’ stays under the surface. If nurses are to change their ‘habits’ they need to want to, otherwise they may just adopt another ‘coping strategy’. Any habit can be ‘unlearned’ but not without choosing to do so! Once the choice is made, the experience can be enjoyable.
Julie Mann Habitfixer.com
Missy | Jan 25, 2010 | Reply
I think that this is discrimination. Is this hospital also doing blood alcohol testing prior to hiring? Or are they doing drug testing? It seems they have chosen to eliminate a select group of qualified staff to prove something. I would not apply at that hospital. Its like “when you point a finger at someone, there are 4 more pointing back at you”! Shame on you!!!
Christina Flores | Jan 25, 2010 | Reply
I hope the hospital has saved up enough money for a huge lawsuit. This is discrimination at work here! There are lots of unhealthy habits aside from smoking including weight.
Reminds me of employment ads I see in other countries when I travel. “applicant must be between the ages of 19-25 weight proportionate to height”. Give me a break. Wish I lived near this hospital so I could take class action against them. What is our society coming to?!!!! Scary….
Bev | Jan 25, 2010 | Reply
It has been my experience smokers can name the health risks without thinking twice. Supporting staff through this addiction and looking at the environment that is provided to carry out nursing responsibilities would be a much better use of resource. All of this from a person who never smoked, however manages those who do.
Karen Chavez | Jan 25, 2010 | Reply
I have never been a smoker and have seen many family members die of COPD, I am very much against smoking. Smokers take far more breaks then non-smokers. I have worked in smoke free hospitals where the staff had to leave hospital property to smoke which took even more time away from their patients. Having said all that, I don’t believe the hospital or any other company has a right to tell you what you can or cannot do on your own time. I have refused to work for a company that put monitors on their staff to track their location while on the clock and I would refuse to work for this hospital as well.
Ann Barron | Jan 25, 2010 | Reply
“let us take responsibility for our actions and enforce what we believe is good for the people”. My goodness, John! (See above comment.) You’re part of the ‘we’, I assume? What would your thoughts have been re. this hospital’s decision when you were still a smoker??
Lucy | Jan 25, 2010 | Reply
O.M.G what will be next. i agree 100% its all about the almighty $. what i dont understand is other companies outside of heathcare do not even contribute to their insurance and healthcare are paying towards our insurance. so who will be saving? us the employee because we contribute or the company? of course the company and how dare they tell anyone how to live their lives. i dont believe that there are too many people on this earth that dont have one, two or more habbits that is not good for their health. how about computers we work on every day, my eyes have gotten worse each year and need new prescriptions each year to compensate. how about the stress level put on all of us at work, raises bp, sugar and alot of employees see a psychiatrist for their stress…are they doing anything about this? NO! they should not worry about our dirty laundry till they clean their own. if it isnt bothering paitient care then i dont see a problem. sounds like a lawsuit to me!
Diane Moolick | Jan 25, 2010 | Reply
The person who is harmed by this is the smoker- and he is doing enough damage to himself already. Are you going to test for caffeine addiction? How about those with poor lifting techniques or illegible hand writing? Hospitals should be more concerned with not harming patients than with enforcing arbitrary rules.
This is expensive, absolutely unenforceable, (weekend amokers, breathing second hand smoke in a bar, people who smoke everywhere but at work). You can restrict smoking in the workplace but it IS discriminatory to restrict personal lifestyle choices. High fat diets? Women who have higher risks for breast and uterine cancer? or men wh have a higher risk for proatate cancer? Who is next.
If you see a colleague have a smoke after dinner in a restaurant, do you report her and get her fired, so you can have her job? What if the allegation were not true and someone said so-and-so smoked just to cause trouble? How would you know? This is exactly the kind of “rat on your neighbor to get ahead thinking that the NAZIs used.
Do not set yourself up with rules you can’t enforce, that waste time and money and and have little or no point.
If you do – realize that he who casts the first stone is the ultimate loser, anf this may well turn out to be the your hospital.
Are you doing the best job for your patients if you restrict staff by other peoples choices? Well we had a really great surgeon, but he smoked so we don’t let him practice here any more. The best cardiologist is over at another hospital because his lifestyle did not fit our corporate goals.
In the end your patients and you hospital are “The biggest Losers”. I would not want your reputation.
Encourage your people to quit – offer smoking cessation through employee Health. Talk it up. Work against tobacco use, not the employment of people who use tobacco.
Your focus is wrong.
Ps – no
I do not smoke, but I do defend someone elses right to.
People speed, don’t wear seat belts, over eat, smoke. Support the person and fight the bad habit. Hate the sin – not the sinner. Where is your humanity? You are in the wrong business.
Healthcare is a people business and hospital staff are people too.
Linda Benth | Jan 25, 2010 | Reply
I have read many comments about how refusing to hire smokers affects the “rights” of smokers. However, who is concerned with the “rights” of the patient? I cannot tell you how nauseating it is to have a healthcare worker come to the bedside smelling of stale cigarette smoke. Those who chew mints and spritz with perfume are fooling only themselves.
I don’t believe the issue is about “setting a good example for the community.” It should be about the PATIENT’S perception and experience. After all, without them, we wouldn’t have a job in the first place. I don’t propose to know whether the hospital’s motives have to do with setting a good example, worrying about rising healthcare benefits, or whether they just might be worried about patient satisfaction scores which, by the way, affects the patient’s choice to return for care. This fact should worry smokers and non-smokers, alike.
No one wants to think that a patient’s decision might be based on such a “trivial” thing. Shouldn’t clinical expertise and skill count for something? However, when it comes right down to it, patients expect that their caregivers have the clinical skill and expertise to do their job. What they do look for is staff who are kind and caring. This includes not showing up at the bedside smelling like an old ashtray, especially for those patients who are sensitive to smoke or who are suffering from a smoking-related illness. This is not kindness, nor does it show a caring attitude for those who ensure our livelihood.
Discrimination, indeed.
John | Jan 26, 2010 | Reply
Why not refuse to hire people because they are women? Maybe someone doesn’t like they way they smell?
Why is it that health care organizations feel the need to control everything? Just getting rid of the people who come up with these rules and regulations would solve our healthcare crisis overnight.
Carol Marden | Jan 26, 2010 | Reply
Ex-smoker and nurse of 39 years I think it is great. No one has a “right to smoke.” There are very few rights set out in the Constitution and certainly smoking isn’t one of them.
My approval has something to do with decreased insurance rates, lack of sticky smell on staff, and more to do with time with patients.
Has anyone noticed how many breaks smokers take? Compare this to non-smokers and I bet you will see that non-smokers have more time with patients.
Deb | Jan 27, 2010 | Reply
Smokers taking too much break time? Is your facility not enforcing guidelines regarding the over-extension of break time?
It has been my experience, as a nurse of more than 27 years…..and as an ex-smoker, that smokers usually are not exceeding allowed break time, as perceived. Actually, most of the other nurses take only one meal break per shift (if that…)and not the other two 15 minute breaks, as allowed by Labor Relation law. Therefore, those nurses are robbing themselves 30 minutes of pay each shift…………not to mention the reason for breaks in the first place: to refresh oneself in order to return to the unit at 100 percent for the patient. And, don’t think that hospital administrators are not aware of that!(…the same folks that remind you not to clock in a second more than 7 minutes prior to the beginning of your shift, as well as requiring permission for any overtime exceeding 7 minutes after your shift..) Even though seemingly trivial, 30 minutes’ pay per each self-sacrificing nurse, per shift, REALLY adds up.
Alas, it is sad to know that a nicotine addiction is typically the reason most nurses will ensure they receive their allotted break time…..
There is a difference between quality time and quantity. Tired nurses that choose to routinely not take allowed breaks are more likely to make mistakes, whether they are smokers or not. It is predudicial to believe that patients will receive better care solely based on the fact that the nurse is a non-smoker. That has not been my observation, as a bedside nurse OR as a manager.
Susie, RN | Jan 28, 2010 | Reply
As I am not a fan of smoking it would be very easy for me to say that I was in agreement with the TN hospital but I am NOT. Last I checked, nicotine/cigarettes are a legal substance for those adults over 18. Urine drug screens that are done for pre-emploment screenings are to identify “illegal” substances (including those the candidates that do not have an Rx for substances found). It has not been proven that nicotine impairs the worker’s judgement or thought process. Setting an example to clientele can easily be done on the job by not allowing smoking on the premisses, etc. Who to have better empathy for a patient with a history of smoking than a smoker themselves. Please stop using a “smoke screen” when the bottom line is the bottom dollar! It is no secret that premiums are cheaper when risk factors are low. And why is it we are allowing insurance companies dictate our lifestyle? As others have stated, what’s next?….too fat, too skinny, too high cholesterol, too funny looking? Hmm sounds like discrimination to me.
Roxanne | Feb 2, 2010 | Reply
I see both sides.
I have lost a grandmother, mother, father, and an aunt to lung cancer. Another aunt is in hospice now with lung cancer. My cousin, her daughter,is on oxygen at age 50. So, I am NOT a fan of smoking and what it does to people and their loved ones. I have experienced its affects firsthand, and it is no picnic. I have never smoked and actually feel nauseated and start to wheeze sometimes when I am exposed to second hand smoke. At times, I have also felt nauseated simply by the smell of smoke on people’s clothing. So, I can understand how that might be offensive to patients who have to endure the “stench” of cigarette smoke on their caregivers’ breath and clothing…which could be an issue to asthmatics and people easily affected by the smell of smoke.
HOWEVER, I do understand how some might be afraid, thinking “What next?” I also love the freedoms we have as Americans. I don’t like discrimination as much as the next person.
I think if a person wants to smoke they should be able to…but, I also think if their clothes and breath stink they should also be considerate of their patients and coworkers by not subjecting them to the smell. Same with too much perfume or other offensive body odors. A gentle reminder might do. It just looks unprofessional to our patients, their families and our hospital to have any offensive odors, whatever they might be.
On another note, I can say that I am thrilled my hospital is smoke free, and I love it when I can visit smoke free restaurants and other establishments and not have to worry about someone else’s smoke ending up in my lungs.
Myra | Feb 17, 2010 | Reply
This act is definitely a move to decrease the organization insurance rates. Smokers are aware of the risk factors and should not be subject too more ridicule. Its bad enough seeing them shivering in frigid temperatures trying to smoke. When will institutions ban employees from wearing perfume and cologne?
myrlande blanc | Mar 12, 2010 | Reply
I don’t smoke, and I think personally, nurses who smoke spend too much time away from patients so they can go out to smoke. I think there should be a limit on smoking while on the clock. As far as being obese concern, I think if a nurse or a doctor is obese he or she should not get hired no matter how good they are.
Buttin | May 30, 2010 | Reply
IMO, it’s a great way to help those who are casual smokers from becoming compulsive smoke. Why reward bad habits? Fat is hard to work with too. It’s sad, but we have to start to address these habits that are being passed on down to our children.