Nonsmoking and Nonobesity Hiring Policies and Practices: A Comparative Analysis

W. Taylor
{"title":"Nonsmoking and Nonobesity Hiring Policies and Practices: A Comparative Analysis","authors":"W. Taylor","doi":"10.5539/ijps.v15n3p26","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: There is a dearth of literature related to nonobesity-only hiring policies. Addressing this significant gap in our knowledge base would enable a better understanding of the consequences of implementing nonobesity-only hiring policies. Methods: This paper analyzed both nonobesity-only and nonsmoking-only hiring policies according to ten criteria. The ten criteria selected were based on earlier literature reviews and frameworks for analyzing nonsmoking hiring policies and practices. Findings: The similarities between nonsmoking-only and nonobesity-only hiring policies were in the prevalence and incidence of smoking and obesity, exacerbating social inequalities, privacy and discrimination, addictive properties, increasing healthcare costs and insurance premiums, and loss of productivity. The differences between the two were in hiring policy documentation, legal protection, promoting a healthy institutional image, and health consequences in the workforce. Conclusions: The most dramatic difference was that second-hand and third-hand smoke have harmful effects on nonsmoking employees (whereas obesity has no such effect on others) and that legal protection is lacking for individuals who are obese (whereas some legal protection does exist for smokers). As organizations consider implementing restrictive hiring policies and practices, considering the ten criteria offered in this paper can inform the decision-making process.","PeriodicalId":90867,"journal":{"name":"International journal of psychological studies","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of psychological studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5539/ijps.v15n3p26","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: There is a dearth of literature related to nonobesity-only hiring policies. Addressing this significant gap in our knowledge base would enable a better understanding of the consequences of implementing nonobesity-only hiring policies. Methods: This paper analyzed both nonobesity-only and nonsmoking-only hiring policies according to ten criteria. The ten criteria selected were based on earlier literature reviews and frameworks for analyzing nonsmoking hiring policies and practices. Findings: The similarities between nonsmoking-only and nonobesity-only hiring policies were in the prevalence and incidence of smoking and obesity, exacerbating social inequalities, privacy and discrimination, addictive properties, increasing healthcare costs and insurance premiums, and loss of productivity. The differences between the two were in hiring policy documentation, legal protection, promoting a healthy institutional image, and health consequences in the workforce. Conclusions: The most dramatic difference was that second-hand and third-hand smoke have harmful effects on nonsmoking employees (whereas obesity has no such effect on others) and that legal protection is lacking for individuals who are obese (whereas some legal protection does exist for smokers). As organizations consider implementing restrictive hiring policies and practices, considering the ten criteria offered in this paper can inform the decision-making process.
非吸烟与非肥胖招聘政策与实践的比较分析
背景:目前缺乏与非肥胖招聘政策相关的文献。解决我们知识库中的这一重大差距将有助于更好地理解实施非肥胖招聘政策的后果。方法:根据10个标准,对非肥胖和非吸烟的招聘政策进行分析。选择的十项标准是基于早期的文献综述和分析非吸烟招聘政策和实践的框架。研究结果:只吸烟和不肥胖的招聘政策的相似之处在于吸烟和肥胖的流行率和发生率,加剧了社会不平等、隐私和歧视、成瘾性、医疗成本和保险费增加以及生产力下降。两者之间的差异在于招聘政策文件、法律保护、促进健康的机构形象以及对员工健康的影响。结论:最显著的区别是,二手烟和三手烟对不吸烟的员工有有害影响(而肥胖对其他人没有这种影响),而对肥胖者缺乏法律保护(而对吸烟者确实存在一些法律保护)。当组织考虑实施限制性的招聘政策和做法时,考虑本文提供的十个标准可以为决策过程提供信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信