No Smoking Allowed On the Job or Off Case Study Analysis Essay

Should employers require the just to ban or fix smoking by their employees at the study? Why do you think so? As is the case with OSHA, employees take aim the right to a beneficial and healthy workplace. Since smoking impedes on that right, I do believe that employers bind the right to ban or restrict employee smoking at the workplace.Second hand dumbbell is a heavy issue, one that is often overlooked by smokers. Nonsmokers bring on the right to non be exposed to aroundthing that they choose not to engage in. It is unfair for employees to be exposed to health risks that they are not personally subjecting themselves to. Additionally, there is some responsibility on the workplace to ensure that added level of a safe and healthy environment. Since flick to smoke is a health hazard, choosing to restrict or ban it cannot be reden as a violation of personal rights.2.Should employers have the right to restrict or ban smoking by employees move out the job, as Weyco did? Why do you think so? I was divide on this situation as I am a unassailable believer in personal rights. But considering the added health costs the employer must(prenominal) ensue for their smoking employees, shouldnt they have the right to say noI do think that employers should have the right to restrict or ban smoking off the job if it meets real criteria. For starters, employees must be given ample notification or if the rule is already in place, be notified in advance of applying to the organization. Next, it is important that existing employees affected by the change, as was the case at Weyco, be given the tools and opportunity to quit. I feel 15 months was an ample amount of time, given the tools the organization supplied, to film lifestyle changes if one chose to. Finally, I think there should be current support to educate and assist with the process.There are definitely certain industries that I believe should invoke this. A good example of this would be healthcare providers. Do you know how many times I see the nurse who is going to be assisting me at the hospital or clinic after-school(prenominal) smoking cigarettes? Ive actually seen oncologists smoking outside the hospital mess who fight for lives that have been affected medically by smokingit enrages me. Thus, I do believe that hospitals should only employ nonsmokers. I must take in when I have to walk through a cloud of smoke to get to work, it infuriates me. I guess you might get a in truth different answer to these questions if you asked a smoker.3.Should the organization regulate smoking at work? If so, what would be the best common policy? Why do you think so? The simple solution to the problem would be to go out the government to regulate smoking at work.By offering public policy that mandated certain industries have to employ smoke free employees, censor all indoor smoking at work, igniting strict parameters on those industries allowed to have smokers, and continuing to penalize empl oyees from a health insurance perspective the government could greatly help deter or control costs touch this awful habit. A possible consideration would be to make smokers amply pay for their own health insurance. If they saw the added cost they have on their employer maybe they would rethink their options.4.Should multinational firms have a single corporate policy on smoking in the workplace, or vary their policies depending on topical anaesthetic laws and norms of behavior in various countries where they do business? Again, this is a question I was thoroughly torn on. Having taken many world(prenominal) business courses,I recognize the importance of doing business according to the local laws and norms. In my opinion the health hazards imposed by smoking and exposure to second hand smoke remain constant regardless of location, local law or behavioral norms. However, it becomes difficult to do business in countries where you invoke rules and regulations that go against what the social norms are. Unfortunately I think if you go against the grain in other countries you are more likely to charge resistance and be unable to find employees to work for you. Although, I besides believe to be fair to US employees, national locations should be treat the same.My organization is owned by a Dutch based come with and they often invoke policies that seem odd here in the US, moreover they blanket all decisions across all locations. I cant decide which makes more sense. My business hat says no they should not have a single policy but my human resources hat says yes they should.