# Can you enforce weight limits on employees as a condition of employment? **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [June 18, 2006, 8:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-you-enforce-weight-limits-on-employees-as-a-condition-of-employment/361193 "2006-06-18T20:12:48Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![M.Meursault](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b487fb/32.png) [@M.Meursault](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/M.Meursault)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2006, 12:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-you-enforce-weight-limits-on-employees-as-a-condition-of-employment/361193/41 "2006-06-19T12:30:39Z")
> [@RealityChuck](#): > > It doesn’t look like weight is a protected class under employment law. It can be an issue if the weight is tied in with other issues (e.g., “no fat chicks” when fat guys are allowed). If the standards are applied reasonably and uniformly (e.g., using standard tables of normal weight for both men and women), it’s not illegal. > > It’s also not illegal to discriminate against smokers. Smokers are smokers by choice; all protected classes are set up for things that are not a person’s choice (e.g., race). I just did a boatload of research into employment discrimination for my job, and I can tell you that what is a protected or an unprotected class is going to vary from state to state, to city to city. While I’ve yet to see “weight” or “obesity” as a protected class in employment, that is going to be a bitch of a problem because weight is so closely tied to health and disabilities. It would probably be problematic to fire someone because they’re overweight as the fired employee might just sue, saying their weight is related to a disability. Also, in Indiana at least, smoking _IS_ a protected class. Here’s a cite: [Indiana Code](http://www.ai.org/legislative/ic/code/title22/ar5/ch4.html#IC22-5-4-1). ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_L.A](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnny_l.a/32/1084_2.png) [@Johnny\_L.A](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_L.A)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2006, 1:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-you-enforce-weight-limits-on-employees-as-a-condition-of-employment/361193/42 "2006-06-19T13:16:15Z")
> [@Sattua](#): > > Isn’t there something like this for airplane crews? _Very_ limited example: A Robinson R-22 helicopter has a seat weight limit of 240 pounds (including underseat stowage). If somsone were employed as a flight instructor and weighed over 240 pounds (including clothing) he would not be able to legally fly the aircraft. ---
**Author:** ![vetbridge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/b5e925/32.png) [@vetbridge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/vetbridge)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2006, 2:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-you-enforce-weight-limits-on-employees-as-a-condition-of-employment/361193/43 "2006-06-19T14:34:30Z")
I have employees who are at an ideal weight, one who is obese, some who smoke tobacco, some who smoke things other than tobacco, some with facial piercings, some with tattoos. I don’t care one way or the other about these things. BUT, if an employee does not do their job well, I fire them. If an employee were to steal from my business I would do all that I could to see them prosecuted. Role models? Pshaw. This aint the NFL. ---
**Author:** ![Podkayne](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/edb3f5/32.png) [@Podkayne](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Podkayne)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2006, 3:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-you-enforce-weight-limits-on-employees-as-a-condition-of-employment/361193/44 "2006-06-19T15:41:07Z")
> [@astro](#): > > I’m sure fat male nurses exist, but (as I pointed out in the OP) I’m referencing an empirical real world observation I’ve made lately, in that I’ve been to several doctor’s offices recently for a check up for myself, and also in helping a a mobility compromised friend see various specialists. Virtually all the nurses I saw in the doctors offices were female, and a fair percentage of them ranged from somewhat to massively overweight. This observation is neither good, bad or indifferent it’s simply an observation. If you were just asking an objective question, and objectively describing your neutral observation, you would have mentioned the characteristics relevant to the discussion, namely that they were a) overweight and b) nurses. You didn’t mention whether they were young, old, white, black, tall, short, curly-haired or wearing pink tennis, but you did specify the detail that they were female, so it seems to me that, consciously or unconsciously, you thought that was an important factor in your observation. ---
**Author:** ![auntie\_em](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/5e9695/32.png) [@auntie\_em](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/auntie_em)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2006, 5:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-you-enforce-weight-limits-on-employees-as-a-condition-of-employment/361193/45 "2006-06-19T17:47:46Z")
> [@lorene](#): > > On the other hand, at one point does it become an issue of “do as I say and not as I do”? If my doctor were talking to me about cardiac health and how heart disease is the number one killer of women, but I could see a pack of smokes peeking out from her pocket…well, it would be harder to consider her credible even if I know her advice on my own health is sound. I used to think I’d feel the same way, but then I started with a new GYN. During our initial consultation, he reeeeeeeeked of smoke, and pretty much confessed (after I confessed a very special love for any food containing butter, sugar, heavy cream, or any combo thereof) that he is a much better doctor than he is a patient (and that french fries are among his many weaknesses). I was still squicked out by the idea of his big, crusty, smoke-yellowed fingers all up in my hoo-ha (yes, I knew he’d wear gloves – and he did – but still . . . ), but I actually sort of appreciated his honesty, and I felt like he might be especially forgiving of my butter-sopped downfalls. So I kind of love him. ---
**Author:** ![astro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9dc877/32.png) [@astro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/astro)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2006, 6:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-you-enforce-weight-limits-on-employees-as-a-condition-of-employment/361193/46 "2006-06-19T18:34:00Z")
> [@Podkayne](#): > > If you were just asking an objective question, and objectively describing your neutral observation, you would have mentioned the characteristics relevant to the discussion, namely that they were a) overweight and b) nurses. You didn’t mention whether they were young, old, white, black, tall, short, curly-haired or wearing pink tennis, but you did specify the detail that they were female, so it seems to me that, consciously or unconsciously, you thought that was an important factor in your observation. In looking at the OP > [@](#): > > Over time I’ve noticed that a a good percentage of the female nursing personnel I see in doctors offers are quite overweight. Some hugely so. Would it be legal if a doctor (for whatever reason) put weight limits (relative to height) on how much their nursing personnel could weigh or is this considered discriminatory in some fashion? I can see how I should have just said “nursing personnel”. The description “female nursing personnel” was made as matter of fact statement in order to convey an accurate description of what I had observed, in that virtually 100% of the nursing personnel I saw in this context were in fact, female. The gender observation, while accurate, was an unnecessary part of framing the question. ---
**Author:** ![Belrix](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/ed655f/32.png) [@Belrix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Belrix)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2006, 6:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-you-enforce-weight-limits-on-employees-as-a-condition-of-employment/361193/47 "2006-06-19T18:55:31Z")
When I worked for the Bell System, the weight limit of the ladders that were attached to the equipment frames were 300lbs. There was a weight limit of 300 lbs for a technician as a result. ---
**Author:** ![Podkayne](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/edb3f5/32.png) [@Podkayne](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Podkayne)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2006, 7:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-you-enforce-weight-limits-on-employees-as-a-condition-of-employment/361193/48 "2006-06-19T19:27:15Z")
Thanks, **astro**. I appreciate you taking the time to reevaluate your OP. ---
**Author:** ![Leaper](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/4bbf92/32.png) [@Leaper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leaper)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2006, 7:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-you-enforce-weight-limits-on-employees-as-a-condition-of-employment/361193/49 "2006-06-19T19:33:47Z")
> [@Zoe](#): > > Absolutely all of our role models must be perfect. Well, this IS a country where a large number of people argued, with a straight face, that the President of the United States is a role model _to teenagers on sexual matters_. ---
**Author:** ![drachillix](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/48db29/32.png) [@drachillix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drachillix)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2006, 9:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-you-enforce-weight-limits-on-employees-as-a-condition-of-employment/361193/50 "2006-06-19T21:36:59Z")
> [@yBeayf](#): > > Where did **astro** say any differently? > What in the world are you talking about? How is it judging a group of people as second-class to point out that most representatives of that group one has seen lately happen to be overweight or obese? The way you’re going on about it, saying that it’s judgmental and offensive to remark that most female nurses one has seen lately are obese, it’s almost like you think that being obese is a bad thing and something to be ashamed of. The other side of the op… > [@](#): > > Would it be legal if a doctor (for whatever reason) put weight limits (relative to height) on how much their nursing personnel could weigh or is this considered discriminatory in some fashion? …Would be, gain too much weight, you’re fired. Not because you are incapable of doing your job, even doing it well, not because you did something wrong but because you have failed to maintain a beauty standard. Is it illegal, nope, not that I am aware of, is it offensive to imply that an overweight person is automatically bad at or unworthy to keep their job, yes very much so. What problem are we solving by not allowing someone to use their employable skills for a reason that has zero to do with how they apply them. ---
**Author:** ![EllisDee](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ellisdee/32/4531_2.png) [@EllisDee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EllisDee)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2006, 1:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-you-enforce-weight-limits-on-employees-as-a-condition-of-employment/361193/51 "2006-06-20T01:11:19Z")
> [@drachillix](#): > > gain too much weight, you’re fired. Not because you are incapable of doing your job, even doing it well, not because you did something wrong but because you have failed to maintain a beauty standard. Is it illegal, nope, not that I am aware of, is it offensive to imply that an overweight person is automatically bad at or unworthy to keep their job, yes very much so. What problem are we solving by not allowing someone to use their employable skills for a reason that has zero to do with how they apply them. Because fat people cost more to insure, just as smokers do, which costs the company money if it offers health insurance to its workers. Pretty simple, really. ---
**Author:** ![Sierra\_Indigo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/f0a364/32.png) [@Sierra\_Indigo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sierra_Indigo)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2006, 1:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-you-enforce-weight-limits-on-employees-as-a-condition-of-employment/361193/52 "2006-06-20T01:35:12Z")
> [@blinkingblinking](#): > > Post office in Australia says posties(i.e. mail deliverers) must be below 90 kilograms And there’s a reason for that IIRC - Australia Post supplies their posties with motorbikes to do the rounds, which is fair enough. The motorbikes have a safe operating limit of somewhere around 130kg. The posties are expected to carry up to 40kg of mail. Thus 90kg is the reasonable safe weight for a postie who has to do a full round on the Auspost supplied bikes. Unfortunately it was a newspaper report that I saw this info in, and I can’t find a cite for it. My google-fu is weak. But that’s an OH&S issue with regards to the Postie weight. IMHO, that’s a legitimate reason for requiring a maximum weight (also, someone at 90kg can still be fat, especially if they’re shorter. So it’s not an appearance deal, it’s solely related to how many kgs they show on the scale). ---
**Author:** ![Unregistered\_Bull](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/3da27b/32.png) [@Unregistered\_Bull](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Unregistered_Bull)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2006, 1:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-you-enforce-weight-limits-on-employees-as-a-condition-of-employment/361193/53 "2006-06-20T01:41:44Z")
> [@Ellis Dee](#): > > Because fat people cost more to insure, just as smokers do, which costs the company money if it offers health insurance to its workers. > > Pretty simple, really. Don’t some races and ethnicities cost more to insure as well? People with certain genetic abnormalities? People that have handicaps such as blindness, deafness, parapalegics, etc.? ---
**Author:** ![monstro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba9def/32.png) [@monstro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monstro)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2006, 1:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-you-enforce-weight-limits-on-employees-as-a-condition-of-employment/361193/54 "2006-06-20T01:42:07Z")
> [@Ellis Dee](#): > > Because fat people cost more to insure, just as smokers do, which costs the company money if it offers health insurance to its workers. > > Pretty simple, really. I don’t want to slide down the slippery slope–really I don’t–but how far do we carry this? If heightened insurance rates is what determines who should get the axe, all other things being equal, then what’s stopping an employer from requiring employees to be vegetarians or to not engage in high-risk activities (like roller blading or motor cycle riding) or to live in certain places? I admit I know little about employer-provided health insurance. Are the premiums a company pays based on the make-up of all the employees in the system, or by the make-up of the employees at a specific workplace? ---
**Author:** ![yBeayf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/e274bd/32.png) [@yBeayf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yBeayf)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2006, 3:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-you-enforce-weight-limits-on-employees-as-a-condition-of-employment/361193/55 "2006-06-20T03:49:33Z")
> [@](#): > > is it offensive to imply that an overweight person is automatically bad at or unworthy to keep their job, yes very much so. I’m still failing to see where the OP implied this. All I see he did is ask whether it would be legal for an employer (such as a doctor in private practice) to require his employees (such as nurses working for a doctor in private practice) to maintain a certain height/weight ratio. ---
**Author:** ![JThunder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e95f7d/32.png) [@JThunder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JThunder)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2006, 3:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-you-enforce-weight-limits-on-employees-as-a-condition-of-employment/361193/56 "2006-06-20T03:59:51Z")
It seems to me that an awful lot of people are piling onto **astro** unfairly – reading things into the OP that simply were not there. This says a lot about the knee-jerk reaction that many people have toward the obesity issue. ---
**Author:** ![EllisDee](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ellisdee/32/4531_2.png) [@EllisDee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EllisDee)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2006, 4:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-you-enforce-weight-limits-on-employees-as-a-condition-of-employment/361193/57 "2006-06-20T04:17:49Z")
> [@Unregistered Bull](#): > > Don’t some races and ethnicities cost more to insure as well? People with certain genetic abnormalities? People that have handicaps such as blindness, deafness, parapalegics, etc.? Aren’t races, ethnicities, genetic abnormalities, and handicaps such as blindness, deafness, parapalegics, et cetera protected classes under employment law? Seems to me the burden of proof would be on the obese employee to prove they had a legitimate disability. Despite the rampant denial here on the SDMB, most fat people are simply fat by choice. ---
**Author:** ![Tim\_T-Bonham.net](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/46a35a/32.png) [@Tim\_T-Bonham.net](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tim_T-Bonham.net)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2006, 10:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-you-enforce-weight-limits-on-employees-as-a-condition-of-employment/361193/58 "2006-06-20T10:19:44Z")
> [@RealityChuck](#): > > It’s also not illegal to discriminate against smokers. Smokers are smokers by choice; all protected classes are set up for things that are not a person’s choice (e.g., race). But what about **religion**? Almost every list I’ve ever seen of protected classes includes religion or creed, and surely that is indeed “a person’s choice”? ---
**Author:** ![JThunder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e95f7d/32.png) [@JThunder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JThunder)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2006, 1:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-you-enforce-weight-limits-on-employees-as-a-condition-of-employment/361193/59 "2006-06-20T13:56:32Z")
Religion is protected under the right of freedom of worship. ---
**Author:** ![M.Meursault](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b487fb/32.png) [@M.Meursault](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/M.Meursault)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2006, 8:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-you-enforce-weight-limits-on-employees-as-a-condition-of-employment/361193/60 "2006-06-20T20:24:46Z")
> [@monstro](#): > > I don’t want to slide down the slippery slope–really I don’t–but how far do we carry this? If heightened insurance rates is what determines who should get the axe, all other things being equal, then what’s stopping an employer from requiring employees to be vegetarians or to not engage in high-risk activities (like roller blading or motor cycle riding) or to live in certain places? > > I admit I know little about employer-provided health insurance. Are the premiums a company pays based on the make-up of all the employees in the system, or by the make-up of the employees at a specific workplace? The thing stopping employers requiring employees to be vegetarian, not do this, do that, etc., is that you would have a massive turn-over rate and your ability to do business effectively would end. When companies start requiring that all employees not smoke (as some have…sorry, can’t find a cite), I’m sure some people quit, but most people aren’t smokers so it won’t really result in a mass exodus. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-you-enforce-weight-limits-on-employees-as-a-condition-of-employment/361193.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-you-enforce-weight-limits-on-employees-as-a-condition-of-employment/361193.md?page=4)