A 30-year-old Boston man who has smoked for more than a decade filed a lawsuit yesterday against Scotts Co., alleging the lawn-and-garden company violated his privacy and civil rights when it fired him because he smokes.
Scott Rodrigues, of Bourne, Mass., says he was fired from the lawn-care job he had for several weeks after a drug test came up positive for nicotine. But he said he wasn’t told he would be tested for the substance and was told Scotts would help him quit.
Rodrigues’ lawsuit, filed in Suffolk Superior Court, says the company violated his rights under the Massachusetts Privacy Statute, which bars the unreasonable, substantial or serious interference of privacy. The lawsuit asks for unspecified damages and legal fees.
"In more general terms, this case challenges the right of an employer to control employees’ personal lives and activities by prohibiting legal private conduct the employer finds to be dangerous, distasteful or disagreeable," the lawsuit said.
Scotts, a subsidiary of Scotts Miracle-Gro Co. of Marysville, Ohio, instituted a policy this year forbidding smoking to promote healthy lifestyles and hold down insurance costs.
In the 20 states that allow it, including Massachusetts, the company refuses to hire smokers and tests all new employees for nicotine, said Jim King, Scotts’ vice president for corporate communications and investor relations.
King refused to comment on Rodrigues’ case because the company’s attorneys hadn’t reviewed it, but he said all new employees are told they must be tobacco-free and will be tested for nicotine.
"It’s on our Web site. It’s on our terms of employment when they are hired," King said. "We make it very clear to people what the expectation is related to tobacco use."
But Rodrigues, who recently was laid off from another lawncare job, said he never knew he would be tested for nicotine; he chewed Nicorette gum on his way to the drug test.
Rodrigues’ attorney, Harvey Schwartz, said companies can require drug tests if they think their employees are using the substances at work or if drug use would seriously interfere with the job. Neither of those justifies a test for nicotine, he said.