If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options
Essential support for under 25s
Essential support for under 25s
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
Thw thing is, I work with children so I can't exactly take breaks when it pleases me and am not really meant to go out of the room. (unless asked to get something from another room)
u dont go to work to pee, or put the kettle on....
just like according to you, you dont go to smoke
not every1 works with kids, some people CAN leave the office/job for 5 minutes and not be missed....
Everyone pops to the loo and for a drink, but smokers will do that AND go for a ciggy.
I used my morning break at the office to go for a cookie and a natter, the guy I worked opposite used his to go for a smoke. Other times we just nipped to the drinks machine down the corridoor.
Other people have coffee breaks, stand by the water cooler and chat breaks, grab a snack breaks...
I understnad if thre is someone going out every 10 minutes for a fag, but then just take action against that one person, eh?
Sitting and working like that for ages is a really easy way to knacker your back and arms, for the sake of your health I'd take up smoking if I were you.
Not that practical, but his suggestion as a former smoker!
Except an employer cannot deny you the right to liquid refreshment.
Can't you see the difference bwteen that and smoking?
The fact that you refer to it as "snide" really answers that one. BTW in some places using the e-mail for personal reasons is a disciplinary offence.
yes going the toilet is a necessity, but so is having a fag for someone who is addicted to smoking....
I'm not that bad and I don't actually object in reality, I'm playing Devil's Advocate here...
Like I said, wouldn't smokers do that in addition?
Question here is how much aids the workplace and how much is time away from work. I have always worked on the basis that smokers can have as many breaks as they like but I expect them to be reasonable and I would pick someone up on it, if I felt that they were taking the piss. I'd would also expect a conscientious employee to take the smoking break out of their lunch break (or not stop for coffee as often) for example - why should the non-smoker be penalised and - as a health organisation - aren't we sending the wrong health message here?
Not it isn't, otherwise how would I last bewteen 8am and lunchtime, or lunchtime and the end of the working day?
I would not expect any member of my staff to do something which I would not do myself.
Yes. Otherwise the most productive workers would all be smokers.
ETA Smokers are statistically less effective because of the associated health problems.
if someone`s never smoked, they wont crave a cigarette
having a fag obviously doesnt increase brain power, but it does allow someone to give full attention to their work, rather than be sat there thinking about having a smoke
You asked if workers will be more productive if they can go for a smoke. I disagree because the majoity don't smoker. You are effectively suggesting that non smkoers aren't as productive because they don't have the drive to find time for a drag.
TBH I'd rather that work was at the forefront of their mind in the first place
Personally, I don't smoke and I never used to see the problem with people nipping out for a fag every now and again and used to actively stick up for them at work. However, now I've been in the working world a lot longer, I can understand and fully agree with those people that think that people should not be allowed extra breaks to smoke.
As MOK says, people are there to work. Tea, coffee, smoking, toilet, whatever should all be done during break time. If that isn't adequate time then people should negotiate extra breaks and a reduced wage in order to fit in their extra activities!!!
And yes I am just bitter and twisted cos I'm a teacher and therefore I can only take breaks at allocated times and spend half my day explaining to children why they can't go to the toilet during lesson time!! :rolleyes:
Smokers don't go and have a cigarette instead of having a wee and getting a coffee, they do it in addition to it. Most people in offices take at least five minutes to get in and out, plus the smoking time. Most people in offices do not have isolated caseloads, which means that the smokers are free-loading on the work of those who don't smoke.
If I went out to the Tesco in my office block for a bar of chocolate I would take the same time as a smoker, but my boss would be unhappy. So I don't see why smokers (who account for a small minority of people) should get preferential treatment.
"They have more time off than we do, stop them, it's not fair!"
*stamps feet*
Hey, here's an idea - how about everyone gets more breaks. It's a crayazeee idea but it might just work...
After reading this thread and thinking a bit more I have changed my mind a bit. I pretty much agree with Kermit I think.
Personally... I do smoke at work, but I dont drink tea or coffee, i might spend 30 seconds getting a glass of water or something, then I carry on. I dont take more than 15-20 mins for lunch, I just eat and carry on cos there is fuck all else to do in the area.
So I think its fair enough that I smoke at work! and in this case banning it would be bang out of order.
But if your taking all your breaks, taking time to have a coffee, AND smoking your taking time that other people arnt getting.
If they want to smoke, they can do it on their time, not the taxpayer's.
I wouldn't ban smoking from the grounds, and I wouldn't ban smoking on unpaid breaks, but I don't see why they should get paid for skiving off for over 30 minutes each day. And I certainly don't see why councils should be condoning such blatant wastage of council tax.
Less work gets done and some people may have to work the extra hours to get it done.
Not if everyone got extra breaks.