HR e-Newsletter
Intelligence Unit Special Reports Special Events Subscribe Sponsored Departments Follow Us

Twitter Facebook LinkedIn RSS

The Just Case for 'Get-Tough' Anti-smoking Policies

John Commins, for HealthLeaders Media, August 22, 2011

While thumbing through the Internet recently I came upon a story from the Indianapolis Star about a new anti-smoking policy at Indiana University Health that extends a smoking ban for hospital employees during their off-campus break times.

The Star article called the ban “one of the most restrictive smoking policies in the nation.”

That is not accurate. Other health systems are far more aggressive. A growing number of providers, for example, have said they will no longer hire smokers, and will screen job applicants for traces of the vile weed. Now that’s restrictive! 

Sheriee Ladd, senior vice president for human resources at IU Health, tells HealthLeaders Media that the health system sees its ban as one that can be justified as patient safety issue.  

“We have told our employees that as the leading health system in the state, it is incongruent with our brand assurance to our patients and our commitment to wellness for our staff for us to continue to tolerate smoking, because of the irritants that come back into the workplace, not only for the employees but for the patients and their families,” Ladd said.

Of course, there is also an HR component at play. Employee smoking and obesity are among the biggest healthcare cost drivers for employers. If a ban on break-time smoking off-campus also encourages employees to quit smoking, everybody wins.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4

Comments are moderated. Please be patient.

3 comments on "The Just Case for 'Get-Tough' Anti-smoking Policies"


Paul Deen (8/24/2011 at 11:24 AM)
I understand the dangers of second hand smoke. The article mentioned that if a patient saw someone smoking in scrubs on the hospital campus, a wrong message would be sent. What kind of message is sent when a patient is approached by an obese employee? Does the hospital have the right monitor what these folks eat when they are not working? I would much rather any hospital focus their energy and resources on eliminating staph in their facilities which is killing thousands of patients each year. There are many things a hospital can do to stop killing these people whose only crime is admitting themselves into their facilities. This whole article sounds like our current government...paying a large amount of attention on smaller, big brother issues while they ignore the larger issues.

Joe Tye (8/23/2011 at 10:39 AM)
There is one other more subtle reason for hospitals to not hire smokers. Over the years, the tobacco industry has done everything it can to undermine public appreciation of the real dangers of smoking. They are no longer able to dress up actors in white coats and claim that more doctors smoke their brands and the Tobacco Institute (the mother of all fraud) is now defunct, but that is still their message. Anytime someone sees a hospital worker smoke, it reinforces the tobacco industry message – it can't be that dangerous if hospital people do it. Another reason to not hire smokers is simple marketing. With smoking relegated to the back alleys and fresh air the norm, smoking is increasingly viewed as low class, unprofessional, and downright stupid by a growing proportion of the population. I'm sure I'm not the only one who would entrust the healthcare of my family to a doctor I saw smoking out in the parking lot. Employees who smoke off the job are, pure and simple, bad advertising for the hospitals where they work. One more thought: when Dr. C. Everett Koop called for a smoke-free America back in 1986, everyone wondered what he'd been smoking. Today, we are virtually there. It is a great metaphor for the power of a few dedicated people to change the world, and for the sort of determined toughness that healthcare leaders will need to face the never-ending healthcare crisis in the years to come. Thanks again for your thoughtful comments on a very important issue.

Lance (8/23/2011 at 9:15 AM)
I always find these anti-smoking policies to be such an oxymoron - I am 110% in favor of totally banning smoking anywhere, anyplace and never having tobacco available to anyone. Problem is, our politicians are addicted to the taxes from tobacco sales as much as the smokers are addicted to the nicotine. Therefore, there will always be smokers and the dilema of what to do with them for using a dangerous but LEGAL product.