Hacker News Reader

Comment by mfer | Hacker News Reader

I'm not sure this works out. I know that people who operate heavy machinery in some states are tested to make sure they never, even in their free time, ingest certain things. Even legal ones. In their case it's done (IIRC) because of the impact those things can have on decision making and it's a safety issue. These situations can even be required by insurance companies to have coverage for the machinery operation.

While the case is different it does show a precedent for dictating some lifestyle choices as a matter of employment.

View on HN

Pilots cannot consume alcohol 8 hours prior to flying for example.

The survival of hundreds of people has more value than freedom of an individual in his free time. One should not be allowed to put other people at risk for fun/entertainment/whatever.

Profit for a business, on the other hand, must not have more value than freedom of an individual. Otherwise, taking this to the extreme, it means slavery. Max profit for no freedom.

> One should not be allowed to put other people at risk for fun/entertainment/whatever.

I assume you mean to assert that the cutoff for putting people at risk for fun is somewhere below pilots going on a bender before flying, but somewhere above getting in a car and driving to the movie theater?

Going on a bender, getting into a car and driving is also illegal.

I mostly agree, but U-Haul is also directly involved with transportation that can affect hundreds. But I strongly suspect they are just trying to lower their insurance premiums and costs of employees not at work/downtime due to health related illness

Corporate employers generally pay a big chunk of healthcare plans and the large size of the pool is helpful in keeping overall risk and cost lower. As long as people expect to get their health care from their employers then employers will have a say in lifestyle decisions of their employees.

That is not how health care was started as a job perk in the US, it was used as a tool to lure employees to work for your company. It's a benefit of working there, because they will get the best employees because they offer the best benefits. With unemployment so low in the US it will be interesting to see how this fairs. A company should not dictate (largely) how you get to live your life while not at work. It's a job, not a lifestyle.

Sure. But is there significant performance/safety impairment connected to nicotine use? I don't think so.

Semi-old pilot adage: "8 hours from the bottle to the throttle and 8 hours from the toke to the yoke." Personally, I am skeptical that this is enough time in all cases.

Two hours/drink is what I've been told it takes the body to process. Mind you I didn't fact check this, and it's highly variable.

While the case is different

That's an understatement. It's wildly different. Nicotine doesn't impair judgement. In fact the short term effects are positive (it can be calming or enhance alertness).

Yeah if it impacts your ability to do your work more than a little that's a different thing.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com