Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
1. They're just lazy, and using that as an excuse not to work.
2. They shouldn't, and most smokers realize that - at least those of us with any kind of work ethic & pride in our jobs.
3. Nope, but it's also not your problem how much they slack off... unless you're the supervisor, let the bosses (and your co-worker) worry about that.
Well it just so happens that I am the team leader LOL. Thats why I took the walk out to the smoke shack and timed it. I like to deal in facts when I need to respond to a problem.
And you are correct it is a work ethic issue. I do have smokers that dont struggle with how long they get for breaks. They are also pretty good workers.
Anyone who purposely puts chemicals into their body that they are told are harmful since they are little kids is not very bright in my opinion. It's the same as if you sit there, day in and day out and touch a burning stove, and then wonder why you are experiencing adverse side effects from it.
And no, it isn't comparable to eating junk food. Certain things we do as humans have varying degrees of harmfulness to ourselves, and excessive drinking or smoking or eating 30 twinkies a day as opposed to one usually go to the top of the list.
You don't need to eat 30 twinkies a day in order to have an adverse effect on your body AND health insurance costs. That's the point.
I often wonder how many of these rabid anti-smokers are environmentalists.
If we are discussing people invading other peoples airspace, what do I do when I am subjected to a woman or man who is wearing cologne that is extremely overpowering or smells down right nasty and cheap??? It actually makes me gag and my stomach flips.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hnsq
I am pretty sure no one has ever caught lung cancer from smelling cologne
My friend's daughter had a teacher who wore HEAVY perfume. It really affected her allergies to the point that they had to medicate her near daily in order for her to be in the class. Even then, she was very uncomfortable and had a hard time concentrating in the class because of the allergies.
Do you mean they have to because they are addicted, is that it? I think that is why they want to not because they have to. Yes non smokers should not have to breathe it.
To the OP, I think only in that they aren't given a decent designated place to smoke, away from non smokers, passersby. Something like a small bus and smoking enclosurse. I think this would be beneficial to both smokers and non smokers. Of course I think what would most benefit both over this ideas would be to help get them started on a program to quit smoking.
yes I meant because they are addicted. smokers smoke because their body craves it not because they simply "want" to. addicts think they enjoy or want a cig but most of that thought is just the addicted brain talking. junkie mentality. let them stop for 48 hours and most of them will understand they are smoking because of the addiction and not because they simply "want" to smoke.
the addiction itself is horrendous smokers don't know how deep their addiction runs till they try to seriously quit. I don't wish detox and a quit on my worst enemy. congrats to all who have quit.
all smokers are slaves to the tobacco industry. putting their lives at risk while making the tobacco industry wealthy.
Let them smoke all thet want, just get rid of the odor. How about we get cigarette companies to create odorless cigars/cigarettes. Their health is their problem. There are enough other things that affect our health that we do nothing about.
The stink isn't the problem, the health care costs are. Smoking costs the Medicare system alone over $10 billion every 5 years (Smokers Cost Taxpayers $10 Billion). Total cost to the health care system is $96 billion a year http://www.tobaccofreekids.org/resea...s/pdf/0072.pdf. Those of us who have never smoked must share these costs--the same as if someone likes to cut themselves, then trots down to the emergency room to get stitched up every week. Similarly, those who insist they shouldn't be required to wear a helmet while riding a motorcycle are also treated at the hospital and rehab facilities that get public funding, even if they don't end up on Medicaid before all is said and done.
And it doesn't help that among the very lowest classes, which receive lots of taxpayer subsidies, the rate of smoking is far higher than in more educated groups. Considering how expensive cigarettes are, I often wonder how those who need taxpayer assistance to survive can afford them.
We currently have a power-mad government obsessed with a "War on Drugs" that fills our jails, criminalizes the health and social problems of drug abuse and addiction, and (as usual) waste endless trillions of taxpayer dollars while accomplishing absolutely nothing. The worst drug by far, the one with ZERO positive effects, which kills over 440,000 American a year, is fully legal for the ridiculous reason that it makes money for Big Business.
And our tort liability system, which managed to put a complete ban on a cheap and widely available combination of drugs that could have ended obesity as a health problem permanently, simply gives smoking a tobacco a pass and allows it to continue to empoverishing us as a society.
EVERYONE in society will end up paying the incredible costs of this one drug that doesn't have one single benefit. Marijuana, and other illegal drugs, at least provide a beneficial effect to those taking it, to offset the adverse health effects.
Non-smokers, do you believe smokers are treated wrongly?
Yes, smokers who are required to exit the work building for the purpose of smoking should be provided adequate protection from elements of nature. Cold Wind Rain Sun
I'm trying to quit now, especially since I just turned 35 yesterday... and I know that's kind of the "danger age," in regards to the long-term effects of smoking (and other things). It's so hard, though!!
Quote:
And I can tell you the odor is worse to an ex-smoker than to a non-smoker.
I don't doubt that... whenever I go a while without smoking, the smell is just awful! But I have non-smoking friends who aren't that bothered, while others are mostly sensitive to the actual smoke.
My friend's daughter had a teacher who wore HEAVY perfume. It really affected her allergies to the point that they had to medicate her near daily in order for her to be in the class. Even then, she was very uncomfortable and had a hard time concentrating in the class because of the allergies.
Absolutely... I'm highly allergic to perfume/cologne, and it usually has lasting (for the whole day) effects on my health. But as a smoker, people think I have no right to complain about anyone else smelling or affecting my health - so I just suck it up, and try to keep my distance from perfumed people.
I am pretty sure no one has ever caught lung cancer from smelling cologne
Maybe not, but people can have serious asthma and/or allergy attacks! My mother, for example, has asthma that can get severe enough to kill her... it's landed her in the ER more than once, and she was even in an "iron lung" as a child (in the '50s).
P.S. I'm pretty sure nobody's gotten lung cancer from smelling a cigarette either. For somebody to get cancer from second-hand smoke, they basically have to be living with a smoker (for many years) who smokes indoors without proper ventilation. I've done research, and it's really not the immediate danger non-smokers make it out to be.
Well it just so happens that I am the team leader LOL. Thats why I took the walk out to the smoke shack and timed it. I like to deal in facts when I need to respond to a problem.
Always a good idea when you're the supervisor! I used to be a manager myself, and without "hard facts," people were sure to challenge your decisions & complaints.
Quote:
And you are correct it is a work ethic issue. I do have smokers that dont struggle with how long they get for breaks. They are also pretty good workers.
Well, there you go. I've never had anyone complain about my breaks, and the staff/supervisors consider me to be a hard worker. In fact, I was just complimented yesterday on how FAST I finished a tough project! My current staff works really hard too, but in the past I've seen my share of slackers - and most (all?) were non-smokers, since smokers are a small minority around here.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
For somebody to get cancer from second-hand smoke, they basically have to be living with a smoker (for many years) who smokes indoors without proper ventilation. I've done research, and it's really not the immediate danger non-smokers make it out to be.
I've never had anyone complain about my breaks, and the staff/supervisors consider me to be a hard worker. In fact, I was just complimented yesterday on how FAST I finished a tough project! My current staff works really hard too, but in the past I've seen my share of slackers - and most (all?) were non-smokers, since smokers are a small minority around here.