|
|
One of my wife's previous employers harvested strands of hair for tobacco testing. "Not only are we going to know if you're smoking now, but we're also going to know if you smoked anytime in the last 18 months..."
I was very happy to learn that they were doing that - and it wasn't for insurance pricing purposes - non-use of tobacco was a condition of employment. |
Yeah that's my question. how do they know you are a tobacco user/over-eater/broken glass inserter?
If you can prove you spend xxx hours at 85% of your max heart rate per unit time (via one of the many workout tracking apps), do you get a discount? I know some plans give you a discount if you swipe your gym badge x times per month, but some of us have gyms at work/home. |
Originally Posted by fooger03
(Post 1450747)
One of my wife's previous employers harvested strands of hair for tobacco testing. "Not only are we going to know if you're smoking now, but we're also going to know if you smoked anytime in the last 18 months..."
I was very happy to learn that they were doing that - and it wasn't for insurance pricing purposes - non-use of tobacco was a condition of employment. |
Originally Posted by TurboTim
(Post 1450755)
If you can prove you spend xxx hours at 85% of your max heart rate per unit time (via one of the many workout tracking apps), do you get a discount?
|
My company ties $300 in gift cards to helathy activities. These range from health checkups, completely challenges, reporting regular exercise, etc.
It's nice for me because I workout regularly and I get a $300 Amazon gift card for it. Covers most of my gym membership. |
Originally Posted by fooger03
(Post 1450747)
One of my wife's previous employers harvested strands of hair for tobacco testing. "Not only are we going to know if you're smoking now, but we're also going to know if you smoked anytime in the last 18 months..."
I was very happy to learn that they were doing that - and it wasn't for insurance pricing purposes - non-use of tobacco was a condition of employment. |
Wow... I just checked my employer's tobacco surcharge. It's $80/mo for each person insured. (both partners)
Last time I had to do the actual test was a couple years ago and it was only a spit in the cup thing and every year since it was just a "sign an affidavit" thing. |
|
Thank you Veterans! Because of you, most of us have it better than we realize. :)
|
To me it's crazy nobody is reporting on the implications of the Saudi Arabia arrests, but basically nearly the whole of the DNC and about half of the Republicans were funded by the princes who are now arrested. Not just funded, but funded massively and in many cases it amounted to the majority of their campaign donations. All the stories I read make it sound like it's just an internal power shift, no big deal. In actuality this could have major lasting effects on US politics.
|
Originally Posted by vitamin j
(Post 1451530)
To me it's crazy nobody is reporting on the implications of the Saudi Arabia arrests, but basically nearly the whole of the DNC and about half of the Republicans were funded by the princes who are now arrested. Not just funded, but funded massively and in many cases it amounted to the majority of their campaign donations. All the stories I read make it sound like it's just an internal power shift, no big deal. In actuality this could have major lasting effects on US politics.
Could it be the Saudis are just settling family scores? |
Originally Posted by bahurd
(Post 1451535)
Saudis are just settling family scores?
|
Originally Posted by bahurd
(Post 1451535)
If I google "Saudi political contributions" that latest news, dated May 21, 2017 is to a piece about $100M donating to a fund Inspired By Ivanka Trump.
Could it be the Saudis are just settling family scores? It makes me laugh that you'll ignore the Clintons taking/spending money directly for various wrongdoings from bad actors, but a fund "inspired" by Ivanka for whom she has no involvement in whatsoever is somehow collusion. |
Originally Posted by Braineack
(Post 1451545)
I thought the Trumps were in bed with Russia. I'm so confused.
It makes me laugh that you'll ignore the Clintons taking/spending money directly for various wrongdoings from bad actors, but a fund "inspired" by Ivanka for whom she has no involvement in whatsoever is somehow collusion. |
The theory of protecting the naming of the next heir to the throne is plausible by detaining anyone whom could object, the detaining of the PM of Lebanon doesn't fit that narrative IMO. (Pic above)
|
Originally Posted by bahurd
(Post 1451535)
If I google "Saudi political contributions" that latest news, dated May 21, 2017 is to a piece about $100M donating to a fund Inspired By Ivanka Trump.
Could it be the Saudis are just settling family scores? What's this? https://sentinelksmo.org/saudi-billi...-into-harvard/ A fund inspired by Ivanka Trump? I'm confused how that involves Ivanka Trump any more than an orgasm inspired by Sports Illustrated model Hannah Davis is the responsibility of Hannah Davis. |
Originally Posted by sixshooter
(Post 1451555)
Ahhh, yes. I see you are a member of The Church of The Double Standard.
Saudi political contributions |
Originally Posted by stratosteve
(Post 1451549)
The theory of protecting the naming of the next heir to the throne is plausible by detaining anyone whom could object, the detaining of the PM of Lebanon doesn't fit that narrative IMO. (Pic above)
|
Originally Posted by vitamin j
(Post 1451615)
This goes way beyond just Saudi Arabia. There are something like 800 sealed federal indictments filed over the past week all across the US since the Saudi operation and I think they are related.
You must have gone down the same rabbit hole..... |
worker dies when hijab gets stuck in conveyor belthttp://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toront...ined-1.4290445
Food company where young female worker died fined $300,000 A commercial bakery in Toronto where a 23-year-old employee died just over a year ago was fined $300,000 Thursday for violating the Occupational Health and Safety Act. The fine comes after Fiera Foods Company pleaded guilty to failing to ensure that a worker near a source of entanglement had secured all loose clothing, as required by section 83(2) of the provincial Industrial Regulation. This violated section 25 (1)(c) of the Occupational Health and Safety Act, according to a provincial government press release. The incident occurred back on Sept. 2, 2016 at the Fiera Foods plant at 50 Marmora Street in Toronto. A 23-year-old female employee who had been sent to the facility by a temp agency and had only been on the job for three weeks was wearing a hijab that was loose at the ends. The hijab became tangled under a guard covering the chain drive of a conveyer belt. An emergency stop button was not within reach, the news release said. At the time, police said they arrived at the facility around 5 p.m. to find the worker without vital signs. She was pronounced dead in hospital. Step 2: Someone gets hurt/killed Step 3: Hold employer responsible and fine them for allowing loose clothing around machinery Quote:If they didn’t allow the hijabi to work on the line they would have been sued and wrongly called Islamophobic. Now, rather than banning the hijab and other head coverings near this type of machinery, the government will further burden employers and fine them. https://creepingsharia.wordpress.com...or-belt-death/ |
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:29 PM. |
|
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands