Faced with rising health care costs, many employers routinely consider much more than applicants' education and work history when hiring.
In some states, for example, employers may legally discriminate based on whether an individual smokes.
This may make business sense. An employee who smokes costs an employer an average of $1,275 more per year than a nonsmoking employee, according to a recent study by the Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine.
But smoking isn't the only health factor that comes at a substantial cost to employers, and like Goldilocks from "The Story of the Three Bears," some employers are getting increasingly particular in their attempts to find something that is "just right." In this case, it's employees who possess all that the employer wants, but none of what the employer wants to avoid.
Recently, a Texas hospital made headlines for its policy against hiring obese workers. It required all new employees to have a body mass index of less than 35, which, for a 5 foot, 5 inch individual, would equate to 210 pounds or less.
While the hospital would no doubt benefit from employees' better overall health, its given reason for the policy is that employees should "fit with a representational image or specific mental projection of the job of a health care professional."
The health care costs associated with obese workers are even greater than those of smokers, according to the previously mentioned Journal study. Obese employees cost an employer about $1,850 more than their non-obese coworkers, and morbidly obese employees cost an average of $5,500 more per year.
Michigan is currently the only state with a law banning weight discrimination in hiring. Without such a law on the books in Texas, this practice may be within legal lines.
However, courts are increasingly considering morbid obesity to be a disability under the Americans with Disabilities Act. There have even been rumblings that the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission may take steps to make obesity a protected characteristic.
Even if the practice may be legal at this time, the hospital in question still has a bit of a public relations nightmare on its hands as the press and the public debate whether the hiring procedures unfairly encroach on individuals' personal lives.
If one applicant smokes too much, and the next is too big, we expect the next applicant - in line with the Goldilocks rule of threes - to be just right. Some will say that the hospital's practice of rejecting obese applicants is within legal lines, and therefore perfectly acceptable, but others may see a slippery slope developing.
What happens when other personal factors make Goldilocks-employers' wish lists for the perfect employee? Where will the line be drawn? Courts and legislators will eventually provide direction to shape this developing area of employment law. Until then, like determining the proper temperature for porridge or the proper bed firmness, it's open to debate and, for some, individual preference.
KATIE LOEHRKE is an editor who specializes in employment law with J.J. Keller & Associates Inc., a nationally recognized compliance resource firm. For more information, visit www.jjkeller.com. Interesting in writing a guest column? Send IN THIS CORNER ideas to business@timesshamrock.com