FAT people are Discriminated against at prime

The difference between intelligence and stupidity is
intelligence has limitations.

As a result of Prime's hiring policy, your roommate and you have been given a wake-up call. But instead of seeing it as that, you prefer to try bending reality to fit your fantasy opinion and refuse to accept the facts, --- thereby compounding problems.

When large people take up two seats in an airliner, they're charged for both of those seats because the airline has to cut one paying customer, --- which amounts to a loss. Are those large people entitled to more room than those considered to be average size? Why can't a smaller person request an empty seat next to them for no charge? What if every smaller person requested an empty seat next to them?
Would that be fair?

If insurance companies raise premiums because the employee pool includes too many obese drivers, it means EVERYbody pays more for their coverage. It seems that heavy people are taking money from the pockets of those who aren't overweight.
Is that fair?

When businesses and employers try to make things fair and even, the one's causing the imbalance of fairness, -- for themselves as well as for everyone else, -- react by whining, rather than accept what is and make an effort to correct the situation.
When a person causing a problem for everyone else has little or no concern for how their problem(s) are affecting others, isn't that considered to be selfish and/or self-centered? A burden?

Y'all have a right to be obese if y'all so desire.
Y'all don't have a right to be a burden to others.
As for being a disability, I think it is a disability, ---
but it's y'all's disability if it's self-inflicted.
As such, it shouldn't negatively affect others.

Of all those who are overweight to the point of being (in their opinion) disabled, how many have self-inflicted disabilities that they could correct themselves?
Should self-inflicted disabilities that are correctable be considered the same as those who have actual medical disabilities that they have no control over?

If so, a drug addict should be classified as having a disability.
Would that be fair?

Could you be more specific as to what you consider to be "crap"?

How long do you reckon it'll take that case to get through the courts?
Who's going to foot the attorney fees?
What are you going to do until it does, --- besides hope it comes out in your favor?

Is your overweight self-inflicted? (Rhetorical Question)
Is there anything that you can do to lose weight to meet the standards? (Rhetorical Question)
If it is self-correctable, are you or are you not willing to do what it takes to shed pounds? (Rhetorical Question)

"Anyone else" shouldn't be expected to support anyone with a correctable problem. To my way of thinkin', to be classified as a disability, an ailment should be a physical deformity or a permanent health related problem that isn't self-inflicted, isn't reversible or correctable, --- that can only be controlled with medication(s).
Having one leg or one arm is a disability.
Alcoholism is not. Although it'll disable, it can be prevented.
If one has an IQ of 50 with an inability to comprehend or learn,
it's a disability.
If one has an average, or higher, IQ, but is lacking in common sense and continually does stupid things, it's not a disability because it's correctable.

Who are you to expect not to be judged?
EVERYbody is judged in some way by others.
Even you judge others. It's a natural thing to do. And as long as we judge others using the same measuring stick as we do when we measure ourselves, there's no sin in that.

How "safe" is any Big truck truck driver having a heart attack behind the wheel while rollin' down the highway at 70 mph?

It isn't about being a "safe" driver as much as it is an attempt to prevent a potentially dangerous situation. Much like defensive driving courses that explain the instruction isn't about what to do when a crash is eminent, but rather how to avoid that situation to begin with.

Overweight and obese people are more prone to experience heart attacks. Following the same logic, removing people who are overweight and/or obese from behind the steering wheel could be preventing a mishap. Can't crash a Big truck if you're not driving one. Is that fair to the overweight person?
Is it fair to others on the highway to allow a time-bomb to continue driving an 80,000 pound projectile? Especially if it's within the overweight person's ability to correct their condition, but for whatever reason, they choose not to correct the problem.

Define "qualified".
If the potential for a heart attack is increased due to being overweight, it would be akin to being diabetic. Diabetics are not considered to be "qualified". Maybe they should whine about our expectation of making the highways as safe as possible? Then, who's
next, ........ the blind?

YuP.
No argument here.
But the insurance companies can counter that claim with they're just making the roads safer.

Well, ....... in those examples I'd be included in the first two, but I'm thinkin' I could fake my way through the third.

.When I open my eyes I see the clinical reports that indicate those who are overweight and/or obese have a higher percentage of strokes and heart attacks than those who aren't overweight.
Should folks with epilepsy be allowed to drive a Big truck?
They just want to be treated fairly and left alone to do their jobs so they can feed their families like (almost) everyone else, too.
HaiL!
They're more disabled than those who are overweight because they can't do much about their situation. Those who are overweight/obese can, for the most part, correct their problem.
Why don't they?

Size matters.
If your's IS bigger,
and has been for more than four hours,
you need to call a doctor.

HuH?

Whuzzat?
Say again?

WhY?

Hmmmmmmmmmm, --------
Maybe to gloat or brag?
Certainly no reason to complain.
Ya reckon.

"Going"?
Going where?
When?

I can't believe you keep comin' back here to tell us that you don't believe this thread is still going rather than goin' away and not comin' back to tell us what you can't believe.
Can you believe that?

 

I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you. In fact, I agree with much of what is posted. My weight is my problem, not a disability. I accept that.

But what about smokers, for example? Isn't smoking a factor in heart disease and increased insurance rates?

 

No way!
Smoking tobacco improves health. :smt033
Smokers are discriminated against :smt075
by mean-spirited, children-haters. :smt045 :smt112

 

I do smoke, as I believe I have stated before. I have smoked for the past 25 years on and off. In spite of this, the only lung damage I have is some very minor scarring from two back-to-back bouts of pneumonia ten years ago. My doctor couldn't believe that it isn't the tobacco itself that's the problem, but rather the chemicals the big tobacco companies add to it. I use 100% natural tobacco and paper with no residual chemicals. He even went so far as to order a chest x-ray to verify what he was not hearing through his stethoscope...he couldn't hear any crackles, wheezes or gurgles he would have expected from a long term smoker.

During my non-smoking times, I gained so much weight I was borderline obese. I was 172 at 5'4" and telling myself I really wasn't that fat. Well, I look at pictures of myself from then and see how I look now. Since I lost the weight, I no longer have acid reflux, my arthritis isn't as severe, I stopped snoring and I have a lot more energy. I'm 142 pounds now. Put another way, I lost 17% of my body weight.

I feel like I am healthier as a smoker than a non smoker. I can certainly run a lot further than I could before. Try climbing a set of stairs while carrying two 15 pound dumbells and see how tired you get. Then put them down and climb the same set of stairs. That's how I feel now. And yes, I smoke.

 

Premiums for smokers are higher at some companies. The last factory I was in raised the smokers premiums without raising the non smokers. Also you had to take a complete physical or your premiums were going to go up. They did however offer a wellness program where they would supply you with the nicotine patches, gum etc. free. If you chose to participate in that then you could sign a decleration that you would quit and you could be tested in 6 months and again at a year to see if you had indeed quit. If you did this you got your premiums reduced at that time.
So not all companies raise rates for everyone just because they employee smokers.

 

Anybody who is over 300 pounds needs to start watching the Biggest loser... Maybe you will be inspired..

 

And people who think that show makes any difference to most of its contestants needs to ask "where are they now"? Most people put the weight right back on.

 

For whatever it's worth, I weighed 450lbs when I started watching that show. I've taken my time with it but I'm down to 290 now and moving closer toward the goal.

You're right though. People find the science of losing weight, but never take the time to figure out the mental aspect that got them there in the first place. I could go on all day about this, but I'm not. I'll just say that whatever it takes to educate, and inspire people to find the discipline, learn the healthy methods, and most importantly take the action necessary to save their own life has to be a good thing.

At least when they put the weight back on they won't have anyone to blame but themselves, and they'll know what to do to fix it. If they're happy being fat, so be it. That's on them.

 

You have to have a plan to keep the weight off - getting it off, the diet, is only the first step. Its not just going on a diet, but doing a complete lifestyle change to make it stay off.

 

i'm not a driver yet and am still contemplating who to start out with, so take it however you want......but my bmi would be to high too which kinda sucks.........i'm 6'1 at about 260 on the hoof.

because i have some experience with this, to answer that question, you have to think to the size of the company and the financial benefits it stands to gain by ensuring it's drivers are "healthy". just at a quick glance, it tells your clients that your fleet is healthy, awake, safety conscious, responsible, clean/presentable and just puts out a more professional appearance. would you want someone who is 5'4 # 300 knocking on your door or someone who is 5'11 @165. like it or not, it ties into marketing and its a smart move for them, maybe not for us. healthier drivers mean less ins premiums which means more affordable health care for the co and driver. look at ins coverage a co pays to has to have you driving across the country.......you may be perfectly healthy except for bmi, but if your 6'1 # 280 vs 6'1 at 185, which do you think on paper is the healthier of the two and is going to merit a deduction in liability premiums etc? odds are that obese folks are far more likely to suffer an ailment like h/a, strokes, severe fatigue etc vs that of that are "healthy". if they are requiring a sleep apnea test, it is to ensure that the drivers are capable of obtaining the appropriate amount of rest to fulfill their responsibilities safely and effectively.............jmo