Smokers lose an average of 3 weeks work every year due to smoke breaks (employers, health insurance)

[misskittytalks]

these are people with bad character who just happen to be smokers. I smoked for years and I know. I didn't take extra breaks. I had the allotted 15 minutes' break time I had for morning and the break time I had for the afternoon, and I took them, outside, for my cigarettes. I didn't "smoke and then run to the bank", "smoke and oh btw, forgot I have to run by Burger King/the drugstore", etc. I've heard tell of those smokers who smoke every hour or every time someone in the office building asks them to smoke; no one's that addicted, now that nobody's allowed to smoke indoors any more we're all used to depriving ourselves for as long stretches as possible.

[Aquarius37]

I can rationalize my smoke breaks at work considering I have NEVER taken a poop break at work (gross, i could never do it) But, people do ALL the time. I'd rather inhale someone's second hand smoke than their poo mist. Point being people are always going to find breaks. Are you people who don't smoke CHAINED to your desk!? If so, that's sad And what about people on their phones!? How is that any different than a smoke break? It's not.

[Aquarius37]

Haven't had a real cigarette in over a year though. At first I DID miss the breaks! But then you find other ways to have breaks. Smokers are just easy to demonize. There are much worse things in life.

[pvande55]

I had a work assignment where smokers did have to stay another15 minutes to make up for the smoke breaks. So they are waking up to it. Translating that to hours, that's 1.25 hr/wk * 52 wk = 65 working hours, about a week and three days.

[Serious Conversation]

Agreed - we've had several smokers at my employer and it ends up excessive.

[CSD610]

Originally Posted by missik999

I think nonsmokers should be entitled to an extra three weeks of vacation every year.

It's no wonder that many companies are only hiring nonsmokers.

My insurance rates have gone down since our company began hiring only nonsmokers.

Our pre-employment process includes nicotine screening, through a blood test. Prospective employees must be nicotine free for one year before eligible for hire.

Non smokers and busy bodies lose more than three weeks of work on average every year complaining about smokers going on a smoke break, playing with their phones, posting on public forums and paying attention to what others are doing instead of performing the duties they get paid a salary for.

[orlando-calrissian]

Originally Posted by CSD610

Non smokers and busy bodies lose more than three weeks of work on average every year complaining about smokers going on a smoke break, playing with their phones, posting on public forums and paying attention to what others are doing instead of performing the duties they get paid a salary for.

Are the smokers not doing these things as well (minus complaining)?

[Tigeru]

As companies don't care about the wasted time I don't either. If they want to breathe out of a hose when they're 60 enjoy the free time now. What I care about is when I have a o make up for the person being gone. 45 minutes a day to sneak out for several cigarettes had to mean somewhere I was doing 54% of the work to that guys 46%. Some even have to spend half a work day coughing so throw in another 15 minutes.

[bpollen]

Originally Posted by Melodica

I know I have vices, but they don't affect others. Smoking affects anyone who happens to be in the vicinity.

Yes. That's why smokng is prohibited in the office space.

But that's not what the posters in this thread are complaining about. They're complaining about the smokers' health problems increasing ins. premiums, wasting time smoking.

The way I look at it, not just smokers, but people who eat pizza regularly, eat beef, have beer guts, have diabetes....all those people who indulge in an unhealthy lifestyle are increasing MY insurance premiums. All the things I forego to be healthy...I can't benefit from a lower ins. premium because I'm healthy. I am forced to pay a lot more because of OTHER people's health problems.

Beef DOES cause cancer. I can't count the big beef eaters who get on their soap boxes about how people need to have colonoscopies, as they stuff colon cancer-causing foods down their gullets.

BTW, you don't need to have been a smoker to get lung cancer. Quite a few of the cases are contracted by people who never smoked.

We are surrounded by carcinogens. It's a cumulative effect. Radiation, chemicals in the food, stuff in the water, bad air (that causes lung cancer, too) in cities, mercury in fish. To zero in on one thing is pretty hypocritical, since there is none among us without a vice or unhealthy lifestyle choice.

[bpollen]

Originally Posted by macroy

How do they define the loss of productivity? In comparison to non-smokers? Or do they take a smoker and measure their productivity when taking breaks vs. not taking breaks?

I'm not a smoker, and I think it's a disgusting habit. However, this point about focusing on smoke breaks (vs. any other type of break) seems like a straw man argument.

There are productive people and unproductive people - period. Just because one smokes doesn't mean they are less productive than the rest. You can have a smoker that does the same work as non-smokers in 75% of the time. So taking a few smoke breaks a day could still make them more productive than their non-smoking peers.

This is true sometimes. I've been irritated at the smokers taking long breaks and chatting downstairs. OTOH, many nonsmokers do the same in the break room or their offices, or talk on the phone. I've always been shocked at the time people spend on personal calls at the office. I think it's a case by case basis, on whether they're time wasters or unproductive.