Time off to give up smoking!!!

[STEED]

I heard on the radio a government research committee of some sort has recommended employers give there smoking employees time off work on full pay to give up smoking.

What clap trap, if this comes law it will open the door for fat people to loose weight drug addicts to kick the habit and alcoholics to sober up. And a whole load of other issues like I need to get my stress levels down, etc and etc.


Just a crack pot idea which most likely will never see the light of day.

90% who phoned in on the radio show said it was nuts.

[SUBMAN1]

Don't your law makers have something important to do?

-S

[gnirtS]

Its the result of a study not a law but it IS stupid enough for the government to consider.

Its discrimination against non-smokers as simple as that.

If they are giving smokers x days of paid leave per year then non smokers should either be credited with their daily wage for that number of days as a salary increase OR also be given that number of days off.

Example, if you want to give smokers say 5 days off a year then i either want 5 days extra off per year OR 5 days salary increase per year otherwise its discrimination.

[STEED]

Originally Posted by gnirtS

Its the result of a study not a law but it IS stupid enough for the government to consider.

Its discrimination against non-smokers as simple as that.

If they are giving smokers x days of paid leave per year then non smokers should either be credited with their daily wage for that number of days as a salary increase OR also be given that number of days off.

Example, if you want to give smokers say 5 days off a year then i either want 5 days extra off per year OR 5 days salary increase per year otherwise its discrimination.

Well these people don't think of the other side of the coin do they.

[gnirtS]

Here's the article if anyone cares:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/6589285.stm

[Penelope_Grey]

That is a terrible idea for all the reasons listed above but not only that, surely a regular smoker would welcome the distraction of work to keep their mind off smoking?

[STEED]

Originally Posted by SUBMAN1

Don't your law makers have something important to do?

-S

Some sort of a government watchdog committee of some sort, they always come out with these crackpot ideas hoping the government of the day will make it law.

[Kapitan]

Consider my job about 75% of the workers smoke there maybe more give them time off and they wont be having any half decent rubbish collections for about 6 months, by that time basildon wont be able to move for its own crap.

[Tchocky]

Well, it makes sense to me. When considering cigarette breaks and the higher amount of sick days, giving them time to quit is a net gain for a company. More time in which to make profits.
So there, its all about money grabbing fat cat etc etc

[lesrae]

Can't be bothered doing all the quote boxes, so:

Penelope: I'm a government employee who was given paid time off work to attend alcohol counselling a few years ago when I was going through, like, a rough patch. This helped me get over the problem and now I can carry on and do the job that £1000's of pounds were invested in me to do. Are you suggesting I shouldn't have had the time off?

gnirtS: Your maths is impecable, I hope your hourly rate reflects it. Don't you think that people trying to get over a strong addiction like nicotine should be given a certain amount of leeway to help them when, as previously stated, it could help the company in the long run.

Kapitan: How much time do you think is lost by your company while these guys are smoking?

[Penelope_Grey]

I'm sorry lesrae but I don't feel comfortable answering your question as my opinion could be offensive to your personal experience. But being an alcoholic and being a smoker are two different things, a smoker is not nearly as bad as an alcoholic is in terms of inability to work and to function effectively, even under withdrawl a smoker can still function to a better extent than somebody under the influence.

[lesrae]

Originally Posted by Penelope_Grey

I'm sorry lesrae but I don't feel comfortable answering your question as my opinion could be offensive to your personal experience. But being an alcoholic and being a smoker are two different things, a smoker is not nearly as bad as an alcoholic is in terms of inability to work and to function effectively, even under withdrawl a smoker can still function to a better extent than somebody under the influence.

Fair point I suppose - for the record I got help before It went too far, so I can still enjoy a few beers.

Originally Posted by gnirtS

Why should they get something other people dont? In other words, why should non smokers be forced to do MORE work for the same money than smokers?
Its not my fault they got addicted to it and if they want to attend anything related to it do it on their own time or without pay.
Just asking for equality, give them time off then give the people who WERENT dull enough to start smoking either the same time off or the equivalent salary.

Logically you're right, but I feel it's the thin end of the wedge - the next logical argument is that smokers shouldn't be allowed to smoke at work if it means they have to stop work, as it's unfair to their colleagues.

Well under the same argument I don't drink tea or coffee so I consider that it's unfair that my colleagues can wander away from their desk and spend 5~10 mins making a cuppa and chatting to others in the kitchen.

Hang on, I've just realised that I don't chat much to people at work, while others seem to do little else - that's unfair.

And now I come to think of it that bloke down the corridor seems to spend a heck of a lot of time in the loo, certainy more than I do.

Where do we stop?

[P_Funk]

Originally Posted by Penelope_Grey

But being an alcoholic and being a smoker are two different things, a smoker is not nearly as bad as an alcoholic is in terms of inability to work and to function effectively, even under withdrawl a smoker can still function to a better extent than somebody under the influence.

They say that addiction to ciggies is harder to kick than cocaine. And I've seen someone in nicotine withdrawl. It was spooky, and I can tell you he was not functional in the least. A more apt term would be anti-social bridging on violent.

Originally Posted by gnirtS

Why should they get something other people dont? In other words, why should non smokers be forced to do MORE work for the same money than smokers?
Its not my fault they got addicted to it and if they want to attend anything related to it do it on their own time or without pay.
Just asking for equality, give them time off then give the people who WERENT dull enough to start smoking either the same time off or the equivalent salary.

I would contend that it is a form of equality to allow them the opportunity to kick the habit. No it isn't your fault that someone became addicted. However its not so cut and dried to say that it is theirs either. People aren't all the same and often unfair things in life drive people to make poor decisions. Even ignoring that possibility, everyone deserves a chance at a better life.

I feel that it is the obligation of society to aid those in need if they are serious about changing their lives for the better. It isn't a matter of forcing non-smokers to work harder. Quitting an addiction is not like lying around waiting to heal. It is a painful and difficult process. Addictions are a serious social issue. By allowing those who wish to change the ability to retain what little balance they have in their lives while they try and solve their issues, it ultimately is better for the company, the person in question, and all of society in general. It offers them a way out of the deadly cycle of addiction.

Life isn't perfectly equal. What makes the world a better place is when we try to help each other out. We create our own equality. I see no problem with making small sacrifices for those that are serious about solving their issues.

I see nothing wrong with a little charity. In fact I think its quite positive.

[gnirtS]

Originally Posted by lesrae

gnirtS: Your maths is impecable, I hope your hourly rate reflects it. Don't you think that people trying to get over a strong addiction like nicotine should be given a certain amount of leeway to help them when, as previously stated, it could help the company in the long run.

Kapitan: How much time do you think is lost by your company while these guys are smoking?

Why should they get something other people dont? In other words, why should non smokers be forced to do MORE work for the same money than smokers?
Its not my fault they got addicted to it and if they want to attend anything related to it do it on their own time or without pay.
Just asking for equality, give them time off then give the people who WERENT dull enough to start smoking either the same time off or the equivalent salary.

[Penelope_Grey]

Originally Posted by gnirtS

Just asking for equality, give them time off then give the people who WERENT dull enough to start smoking either the same time off or the equivalent salary.

I resent that remark, I am not dull. I have 3 A-levels grades A, A, C. I am not dull in the slightest. When I chose to start smoking I didn't do so because of peer pressure or because some celebrity was smoking, I started because I tried it and liked what I tried. I know I will have to stop soon if I want to avoid permanent damage to my health. But I don't think its fair to make such a sweeping remark as that.