Should Smoking Breaks be Banned in the Workplace?

My name is URL · 15-03-2012 01:06AM

Just stop calling them smoking breaks and everyone's a winner. The fact that some/most employers will allow for 'smoking breaks' and not just 'breaks' is what seems stupid considering how it has being shown that regular breaks increase productivity.

ArmaniJeanss · 15-03-2012 01:30AM

Whats the problem as long as the smoke-break-taker is doing enough work to fulfil the output requirements of their job?

If they are getting 10% less of whatever it is they are supposed to be doing done then surely they will be pulled up by their immediate boss anyway.

Pace2008 · 15-03-2012 01:59AM

Pottler wrote: »

People love rules but funnily enough, the best life is usually when you ignore them all and just do your own thing. As long as you do it well, who cares how many breaks you take?

Hear me now.

Alan 1990 · 15-03-2012 02:08AM

Dam right they should be banned, why should smokers get a break other workers who don't smoke aren't entitled to? Doesn't seem very fair to me.

starbelgrade · 15-03-2012 02:15AM

georgiecasey wrote: »

Not trolling here, genuinely curious, but what kind of company do you run where you hire and manage employees and *still* have time for close to 20k posts on boards.ie in 4 years?

I rarely post during the day - I don't spend a lot of time in the office. Most of my posting is done when I get home. I also type pretty fast.

Logical Fallacy · 15-03-2012 02:16AM

Alan 1990 wrote: »

Dam right they should be banned, why should smokers get a break other workers who don't smoke aren't entitled to? Doesn't seem very fair to me.

This is from the HSA site...

"Employers must plan work so that daily work at VDU's is interrupted periodically by breaks or changes in activity which reduce the work at the screen. Although the Regulations set no frequency for breaks, no single continuous period of work at a screen should, in general, exceed one hour."

So i guess people that work with VDU's are covered unless they are really pulling the piss.

ProudDUB · 15-03-2012 02:20AM

No problem with EVERYONE getting decent breaks, but not smokers getting to take more than everyone else just because they smoke. That's not fair, not when their co workers have to pick up their slack when they are out back having a fag. I used to run a restaurant in the US. The worst waiters/waitresses were the smokers who couldn't make it thru a busy lunch or dinner shift without needing to stop for a fag. They never could be found when they were needed most as they were usually out back taking a ciggie break. They were the ones that had the most complaints from their customers about having to wait for their food or their bill & were the worst at pitching in doing the back of house tasks that have to be done. Others had to step in and pick up their slack. All because they were out back giving themselves lung cancer when every one else was working. Drove me effing mental !

SouperComputer · 15-03-2012 02:29AM

Years ago a company I worked for gave "smokers" 3x5min breaks a day. I started taking 15min naps at my desk instead and got pulled aside. Told them I was smoking in my sleep and basically GFY.
Later on I filed some paperwork to HR requesting a Guiness break, it was rejected.

loadabollox.

Sinfonia · 15-03-2012 02:34AM

stupidusername wrote: »

I voted no and i'm a non smoker. I don't think they need to be banned exactly, but non smokers should get the same break time. the fact that they don't already is complete and utter bollocks.

And I don't drink tea or coffee either so it's not like I'd get a significant break time in that way.

You do get an extra decade or so of life, so it's your choice really.

Logical Fallacy · 15-03-2012 02:36AM

Sinfonia wrote: »

You do get an extra decade or so of life, so it's your choice really.

Yeah but it's a **** decade in fairness.

stupidusername · 15-03-2012 02:36AM

Sinfonia wrote: »

You do get an extra decade or so of life, so it's your choice really.

Ah right,so I can retire 10years earlier? Sweet

Sinfonia · 15-03-2012 02:40AM

stupidusername wrote: »

Ah right,so I can retire 10years earlier? Sweet

Probably, with the price of cigarettes as it is, smokers will need the extra money..!

Logical Fallacy wrote:

Yeah but it's a **** decade in fairness.

Depends how you spend it, Clint Eastwood's 81 and still livin' it up!

Edit: Actually, Hugh Hefner's 85, even better!

GoldDustWoman · 15-03-2012 02:42AM

It's their business. I think when you start telling people if they can or cannot have a smoke, you are no longer a boss but a dictator!

Yakult · 15-03-2012 02:49AM

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar wrote: »

smokers shouldn't get breaks other workers aren't entitled to

Maybe they are, but just don't seize the opportunity. I used to have 2 or 3 non smokers come outside with me for a quick break most times.

ProudDUB · 15-03-2012 02:53AM

GoldDustWoman wrote: »

It's their business. I think when you start telling people if they can or cannot have a smoke, you are no longer a boss but a dictator!

Rubbish. All I wanted to do was run a restaurant where people came in, had a meal and got out again in decent enough amount of time. I couldn't do that if half my waiters, cooks, bartenders & dishwashers were out back having a fag when the restaurant was packed & we needed all hands on deck. A busy "no smoke breaks allowed" lunch shift only lasted from noon to 1.30. It's not like I was asking them to work 10 hours down in a a coal mine without a break or a breath of fresh air.

Alan 1990 · 15-03-2012 03:19AM

Logical Fallacy wrote: »

Alan 1990 wrote: »

Dam right they should be banned, why should smokers get a break other workers who don't smoke aren't entitled to? Doesn't seem very fair to me.

This is from the HSA site...

"Employers must plan work so that daily work at VDU's is interrupted periodically by breaks or changes in activity which reduce the work at the screen. Although the Regulations set no frequency for breaks, no single continuous period of work at a screen should, in general, exceed one hour."

So i guess people that work with VDU's are covered unless they are really pulling the piss.

I've never worked in an office or behind screens so work with vdu's doesn't apply to me or my past colleges that went for a 'smoke' every 15 minutes.

Jev/N · 15-03-2012 03:23AM

Hande hoche! wrote: »

Some people take smoke breaks, others tea breaks. Once it's not excessive.

The problem is some people take both

GoldDustWoman · 15-03-2012 03:27AM

ProudDUB wrote: »

Rubbish. All I wanted to do was run a restaurant where people came in, had a meal and got out again in decent enough amount of time. I couldn't do that if half my waiters, cooks, bartenders & dishwashers were out back having a fag when the restaurant was packed & we needed all hands on deck. A busy "no smoke breaks allowed" lunch shift only lasted from noon to 1.30. It's not like I was asking them to work 10 hours down in a a coal mine without a break or a breath of fresh air.

It's not rubbish.

I meant that when you allow an employee to take their break you shouldn't be monitoring whether they smoke or not. That's their decision.

I didn't mean an employee should be asking for a cigarette break every hour. That'd be ridiculous.

Nailz · 15-03-2012 03:27AM

Leave it up to the company and put it in their contracts if need be, this is a type of subject which should not be dictated by the state. If the employer is happy for the employees to have smoking breaks then so be it.

[non-smoker]

pragmatic1 · 15-03-2012 03:32AM

If I dont get a cig break every few hours my I'll start getting violent.

ProudDUB · 15-03-2012 04:06AM

GoldDustWoman wrote: »

It's not rubbish.

I meant that when you allow an employee to take their break you shouldn't be monitoring whether they smoke or not. That's their decision.

I agree. What they do on their breaks is their decision as long as the timing of the breaks are mutually agreed to by staff and management. The problem I had was that the smokers were always the ones to shag off for a fag just when we needed them most, far, far often than the non smokers needed a bathroom break for example.

The shift in my restaurant was 9am-4pm. From 9-11.45, staff could take as many breaks as they wanted as long as their assigned duty was done by the time that we opened. When business died down around 1.30, they could take as many breaks as they wanted as long as their closing duties were done before they clocked off. The rule was that from 12 noon to 1.30pm all breaks had to be sanctioned by a manager, as that was when we were super busy. I don't think that it was unreasonable.

My problem with the smokers was that they frequently flouted this rule as by 12.30 most of them were gasping for a fag and were nowhere to be found. The non smokers were all perfectly ok with being asked to work for the ungodly amount of time of 90 mins without a break. The smokers never were, and that is what pissed me off about them.

GoldDustWoman · 15-03-2012 04:11AM

ProudDUB wrote: »

I agree. What they do on their breaks is their decision as long as the timing of the breaks are mutually agreed to by staff and management. The problem I had was that the smokers were always the ones to shag off for a fag just when we needed them most, far, far often than the non smokers needed a bathroom break for example.

The shift in my restaurant was 9am-4pm. From 9-11.45, staff could take as many breaks as they wanted as long as their assigned duty was done by the time that we opened. When business died down around 1.30, they could take as many breaks as they wanted as long as their closing duties were done before they clocked off. The rule was that from 12 noon to 1.30pm all breaks had to be sanctioned by a manager, as that was when we were super busy. I don't think that it was unreasonable.
My problem with the smokers was that they frequently flouted this rule as by 12.30 most of them were gasping for a fag and were nowhere to be found. The non smokers were all perfectly ok with being asked to work for the ungodly amount of time of 90 mins without a break. The smokers never were, and that is what pissed me off about them.

I think you were more than fair to smokers in this case. I'm a smoker but I would never consider going for a cigarette break while I was working especially if it was a super busy time.

I guess I'd never consider it because I realize that my employer is the one who is keeping me in cigarettes by paying my wages and so my job should take priority

DonkeyStyle \o/ · 15-03-2012 08:28AM

Should Smoking Breaks be Banned in the Workplace?

"The workplace" is a big and varied place, some of us can legitimately take our work outside.

Dubit10 · 15-03-2012 09:11AM

In my experience it's people from lower social economic back rounds and folk with a lower IQ who engage in smoking outside the workplace. Jacinta, Wacko and the likes.

mattjack · 15-03-2012 09:22AM

Dubit10 wrote: »

In my experience it's people from lower social economic back rounds and folk with a lower IQ who engage in smoking outside the workplace. Jacinta, Wacko and the likes.

Spare a Johnny Blue , Bud ?

Paparazzo · 15-03-2012 09:47AM

Dubit10 wrote: »

In my experience it's people from lower social economic back rounds and folk with a lower IQ who engage in smoking outside the workplace. Jacinta, Wacko and the likes.

Actually, now that you say it, in my experience, the people who take the piss and spend half the day smoking are all a bit knackery. But if they didn't smoke they'd find another way of taking the piss.

mattjack · 15-03-2012 09:51AM

Paparazzo wrote: »

Actually, now that you say it, in my experience, the people who take the piss and spend half the day smoking are all a bit knackery. But if they didn't smoke they'd find another way of taking the piss.

Half the day ? where do you work that allows this.

inforfun · 15-03-2012 10:14AM

Deny me my smoke breaks and i start breaking other things.

Smoking might be bad for me but it is much healthier for the ones around me if i can step outside every now and then.
Would only be my regular breaks anyway.

pickarooney · 15-03-2012 10:36AM

What's to stop anyone going for a non smoke break? I refuse to believe a boss would actually prevent you taking a few minutes off because he/she knew you didn't smoke while letting your colleagues go out for a fag.

Sleepy · 15-03-2012 11:18AM

Meh, I wouldn't define my time spent smoking at work as a break. Now, maybe it's because I'm pretty much the only smoker in the company but I go out for a smoke to think about whatever problem I'm working on at the time. Usually the break from the computer screen helps me think about the problem in a different light and often results in the solution.

Should Smoking Breaks be Banned in the Workplace?

Comments