Reader Info
Advertising, subscriptions, staff, privacy policy, contact info, freelancers' guidelines, etc.




News Bites
Michael Miner on the media | RSS | Archive | Search


There was a time when a cloud of smoke meant one of two things: a passing train or a city room. But today the smokers at the great newspapers of America have been ordered to take their filthy habit to the street, and the Tribune Company has something harsher yet in store for them: Beginning January 1, smokers in its employ will have to pay an extra $100 a month for medical coverage. If they've signed up for family coverage, they'll also pay extra if any dependent smokes.

Is this Big Brother, policing the vices not only of the worker but of his or her entire family--and not merely at the office but at home? That's certainly one way of looking at this new policy, but Tribune Co. prefers another: the company spends $100 million a year on medical coverage, and the smoking surcharge recoups a bit of that money while encouraging employees to improve their health.

Last October, during the company's last open enrollment period, its employees were asked if they, their spouses, or their children smoked. Employees who said no are on their honor--Gary Weitman, VP of corporate communications, says no one's being asked to turn in mendacious colleagues. But anyone answering yes will be docked the extra $100 a month unless and until the family smoker(s) enroll in and complete a cessation program, Free & Clear, covered by the company. "We've always promoted cessation programs," says Weitman. "What's new is we're 100 percent funding it."

The drawbacks to this new initiative are easy to spot. "Fucking Nazi Germany -- if someone comes to a party at your house and sees you smoking, does he turn you in?" at least one Tribune staff writer wonders. "What's next? People with more than two drinks a day, or bacon for breakfast?" On the other hand, this staff writer named a senior Tribune editor and a photographer who've decided to quit as a result of the policy. And parents of teenage smokers have been given another card to play:"You want to smoke, you pay the money."

The new Tribune policy is part of a growing movement in the corporate world. What will happen to it when Sam Zell shows up with his Marlboros remains to be seen; maybe he'll inherit Mike Royko's old personal smoking room.

Also, bacon's safe for now. The latest word is it could help protect your heart


Comments
(please read our policy)
Mike L
December 14th - 12:43 p.m.
Having recently left the company I used to work for, I find that my wife's insurer does something very similar. I was asked to fill out a questionnaire and for saying I'm a nonsmoker I get a reduction in the part of the premium we pay out of pocket. I think it makes a lot of sense. Why should I pay for the health problems of smokers? To those who wonder if bacon or wine are next, I believe the statistics show that smoking is WAY more serious than other vices.
Koji
December 14th - 4:44 p.m.

First smoking... next obesity? Lesser insurance rates for the non-obese? What about mental illness? Lesser rates for the mentally sound, and how would you define that? And for having had no drug addictions or STDs? Lesser rates for people that don't have any of those? And... the list could go on, and on. Soon all of us will realize that we are un-insurable.


Claire
December 15th - 1:02 a.m.
All this started with "drug-free" workplaces which allowed employers to drug test their workers as a condition of employment. I'll bet that employees being tested for tobacco usage isn't all that far behind. After all, why take anyone's word for it?

"Soon all of us will realize that we are un-insurable." Thus thee crisis in employer-provided health insurance is solved!



The News Bites blogroll
Harold, Daily by Harold Henderson

The View From Here by Andrew Patner




Branzburg v. Hayes, the split U.S. Supreme Court decision (1972) generally construed by journalists and judges alike as affirming some sort of reporter's privilege in federal courts.

U.S. Appellate Judge Richard Posner's influential opinion in McKevitt v. Pallasch (2003) telling those journalists and judges they were wrong -- there is no such privilege.

John Milton's Areopagitica (1643), one of the earliest and most eloquent arguments for a free press. Said Milton: "As good almost kill a man as kill a good book; who kills a man kills a reasonable creature, God's image; but he who destroys a good book, kills reason itself, kills the image of God, as it were in the eye."

©1996-2008 Creative Loafing Media All Rights Reserved.   We welcome your comments and suggestions.