The Baylor Health Care System announced their “no nicotine” policy last week, barring anyone who uses tobacco in any form from working for them. This policy will go into effect next year. Baylor’s decision to stop hiring cigarette smokers is nothing new. In the early 2000s, Baylor began “smoking cessation” programs for employees that would help them kick the addiction. In 2007, Baylor banned smoking on its campus altogether, charging employees that smoke $50 a year to supplement the free healthcare Baylor provides them. Baylor has now decided the take the next step. The Daily Campus Editorial Board feels that there are legitimate arguments for both sides and has decided to argue both for and against the smoking ban.
FOR
As one of the largest hospitals in the state of Texas and one of the largest private hospitals in the country, Baylor University Medical Center has an obligation to set the standard for other health-care providers in the United States. While doctors, surgeons, nurses and staff members who smoke may have the capacity to provide excellent health-care to their patients, hospitals are beginning to ask themselves whether someone with a nicotine addiction is really the kind of person they want telling their patients how to live healthy lifestyles.
After all, Baylor Health Care Systems has an ongoing investment in their employees. Given the salaries they pay and the benefits they provide, employees represent an extremely valuable asset to the hospital. By choosing to no longer hire tobacco users and pressuring current employees to quit the habit, Baylor is securing the long-term security of its investment. While discriminating against smokers in the hiring process may seem a bit cruel, Baylor is within its right to do so. No law exists on the state or federal level that restricts employers from discriminating against smokers. And because Baylor is a private hospital, they have even more liberty to limit their candidate pool as they see fit. In fact, smoking is not an unalienable right. In 2008, the Tobacco Control Legal Consortium published a pamphlet entitled, “There is No Constitutional Right to Smoke,” squelching any notion of an “irrevocable right to