HOUSE BILL REPORT

HB 2773

BYRepresentatives R. King, Smith, Vekich, S. Wilson and Day

Making it an unfair practice to discriminate in employment because of an individual's use of lawful tobacco products during nonworking hours.

House Committe on Commerce & Labor

Majority Report:  Do pass as amended.  (8)

      Signed by Representatives Vekich, Chair; Smith, Ranking Republican Member; Forner, Jones, R. King, Leonard, Prentice and Walker.

Minority Report:  Do not pass.  (1)

      Signed by Representative Wolfe. 

House Staff:Jim Kelley (786-7166)

AS REPORTED BY COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE & LABOR FEBRUARY 2, 1990

BACKGROUND:

There is nothing in the law prohibiting an employer from requiring as a condition of employment, promotion, or continued employment that an applicant or employee use or refrain from using lawful tobacco products during nonworking hours.

Further, there is nothing in the law prohibiting an employer from discharging or discriminating against an employee on the ground that the employee does or does not consume lawful tobacco products during nonwork hours.

Oregon and Virginia have recently enacted laws prohibiting employers from requiring that employees or potential employees refrain from using tobacco products during nonwork hours.

SUMMARY:

BILL AS AMENDED:  It is an unfair labor practice for an employer to require as a condition of employment, promotion, or continued employment that an employee or prospective employee use or refrain from using lawful tobacco products during nonwork hours.

It is an unfair labor practice for an employer to discharge or fail or refuse to hire an individual on the ground that the employee does or does not consume lawful tobacco products during nonwork hours.

This section does not apply if a collective bargaining agreement affects off-duty use of tobacco products.

An employer may offer financial incentives to its employees designed to encourage nonsmoking.

AMENDED BILL COMPARED TO ORIGINAL:  The amended bill removes the provision that would make it an unfair labor practice to discriminate against an individual with respect to compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment on the ground that the employee does or does not consume lawful tobacco products during nonworking hours.  The amended bill provides that employers may offer financial incentives to employees to encourage nonsmoking.

Fiscal Note:      Requested January 27, 1990.

House Committee ‑ Testified For:    Joe Daniels, Tobacco Industry Labor Management Committee; and David N. Westberg, Stationary Engineers.

House Committee - Testified Against:      Mike Ryherd, Tobacco Addiction Coordination Council; and Paul Lovgren, Fresh Air for Nonsmokers.

House Committee - Testimony For:    This is an issue of privacy rights.  Employers should not be allowed to control what their employees do on their own time.

House Committee - Testimony Against:      This bill would prohibit employers and insurers from tailoring their health care packages to nonusers.  It costs money to hire and keep tobacco users.  We should not protect the consumption of an addictive substance.