No, and in the last company I worked in, you could only smoke exclusively in your lunch hour, if you were caught doing otherwise, it was instant disciplinary action.Strain42 said:
And no, I wouldn't be surprised at all.
Gamer Fired for taking "Pokemon Breaks."
- Thread starter Strain42
- Start date
And no, I wouldn't be surprised at all.
They get five minute breaks, we don't smell.
Win/win.
(But in all seriousness, I'm pretty sure that over here - UK - you're entitled to a lunch break and then two 15-minute breaks, so you shouldn't need any extra time for smoking. And if you do, well, tough.)
Win/win.
(But in all seriousness, I'm pretty sure that over here - UK - you're entitled to a lunch break and then two 15-minute breaks, so you shouldn't need any extra time for smoking. And if you do, well, tough.)
Pokemon breaks should be mandated by law.
They are required for a healthy, happy lifestyle and work ethic.
Who cares about smoke breaks?
They are required for a healthy, happy lifestyle and work ethic.
Who cares about smoke breaks?
And since there is no way they can avoid becoming addicted, and no way to stop....Scarim Coral said:
I mean, seriously, if it's an addiction, why not offer smoker cessation programs instead of continuing to enable? Think about all the lost time and productivity.
Funny story. before I worked in the field, and now from home, I was brought in to run the office. At the time there were quite a few smokers. The person who ran the office before me let them go smoke as they pleased, multiple times a day.
My first day there the secretary gets up to go outside to have a cigarette. I had to politely inform her that she got an hour break each and every day and was free to smoke as much as she liked during that break. However, before and after that break she was on company time and the company wasn't paying her, or anyone else, to smoke. I killed smoke breaks there and then
You'd of thought I was telling these people they were going to start working 16 hour days of back breaking labor with no breaks at all. They even went as far as to go to the owner, who told them in so many words to fuck off, and complain that I was treating smokers unfairly. I responded when asked that I was treating them the same as everyone else. Non smokers only got a 1 hour lunch break and smokers didn't deserve special treatment simply because of a disgusting habit.
Suffice to say we actually had a few people up and quit over not being able to leave the building as they saw fit on company time so they could smoke. I'm happy to say that once I transferred into the field the rule about smoke breaks remained in place and employees to this day are only allowed to smoke during their scheduled breaks.
Smoke breaks are needless wastes of time. Nobody should get extra time away from work for their poor life choices. If someone can't go til their break or their scheduled time off without smoking then that is their problem not the employers. Smokers do not deserve special treatment of being allowed extra breaks to indulge their habits.
My first day there the secretary gets up to go outside to have a cigarette. I had to politely inform her that she got an hour break each and every day and was free to smoke as much as she liked during that break. However, before and after that break she was on company time and the company wasn't paying her, or anyone else, to smoke. I killed smoke breaks there and then
You'd of thought I was telling these people they were going to start working 16 hour days of back breaking labor with no breaks at all. They even went as far as to go to the owner, who told them in so many words to fuck off, and complain that I was treating smokers unfairly. I responded when asked that I was treating them the same as everyone else. Non smokers only got a 1 hour lunch break and smokers didn't deserve special treatment simply because of a disgusting habit.
Suffice to say we actually had a few people up and quit over not being able to leave the building as they saw fit on company time so they could smoke. I'm happy to say that once I transferred into the field the rule about smoke breaks remained in place and employees to this day are only allowed to smoke during their scheduled breaks.
Smoke breaks are needless wastes of time. Nobody should get extra time away from work for their poor life choices. If someone can't go til their break or their scheduled time off without smoking then that is their problem not the employers. Smokers do not deserve special treatment of being allowed extra breaks to indulge their habits.
Diabetics are for the most part that way because of weight and diet choices. There is a rare subset of people for whom Diabetes Mellitus was in the cards regardless of the hand they played but for the most part people who end up diabetic did a portion of the work required to get them there.
Taking break to check up on health issues, regardless of whether they are caused by choice or not isn't a matter of privilege it is a matter of pragmatism. As a boss your only concern is the ends and the only reason that you would limit your employee's taking breaks of any type, smoke or otherwise is to increase productivity. Smokers, diabetics and anyone else who has some sort of issue that will degrade their function should take the breaks as it will increase their overall productivity. Does this mean that the otherwise normal people shouldn't get breaks to? Of course they should, as long as it is productivity enhancing, and especially if it becomes a moral issue linked to the unfairness of smoke breaks.
Thing is that at a job there is only one purpose, and that it is to accomplish the task. If your habit requires feeding to optimize your ability to stay on task then it is good to feed it. If it detracts it should be starved.
Taking break to check up on health issues, regardless of whether they are caused by choice or not isn't a matter of privilege it is a matter of pragmatism. As a boss your only concern is the ends and the only reason that you would limit your employee's taking breaks of any type, smoke or otherwise is to increase productivity. Smokers, diabetics and anyone else who has some sort of issue that will degrade their function should take the breaks as it will increase their overall productivity. Does this mean that the otherwise normal people shouldn't get breaks to? Of course they should, as long as it is productivity enhancing, and especially if it becomes a moral issue linked to the unfairness of smoke breaks.
Thing is that at a job there is only one purpose, and that it is to accomplish the task. If your habit requires feeding to optimize your ability to stay on task then it is good to feed it. If it detracts it should be starved.
1)Yes, I wouldn't hate work as much. I used to take manga or Batman breaks, but if I had a handheld, that would have staved off the postal thoughts as well.
2)Nope, not one bit.
2)Nope, not one bit.
Can't speak too much from experience, since the only place I've worked everyone was allowed to go for a break and do whatever every so often (some went to smoke, I went to get a drink and such). A couple of people I know work for the local council (don't know what it would be called in the US) and some people do take the piss with smoke breaks there though.
Personally though, I figure it should be like where I worked - you want to smoke then you do it in your own time or everyone gets the time for breaks.
Personally though, I figure it should be like where I worked - you want to smoke then you do it in your own time or everyone gets the time for breaks.
You win a with this one.Fawxy said:
You chose to be a smoker, wait for your damn break to smoke. And for the record, nicotine addiction is NOT physical, it is a purely psychological addiction. You don't get the shakes or bodyaches if you don't get your nicotine fix. You just become an asshole.
I remember this kind of issue being raised a few years ago.
Non smoking employees of big companies were complaining that smoking employees were getting more break times than non smoking employees. The smoking employees defended this extra break time by saying that it wasn't that much time and that it helped them get through the work day. The non smoking employees rebutted that over a year, the smoking employees were getting between 1-3 days off due to the amount of time they spent outside taking smoke breaks.
One of the companies resolved the matter by making the smoking employees take their smoke break time out of their lunch and other break time, while another gave small bonuses to employees that didn't smoke (like an extra few days of paid holiday).
I think that if someone wants to go out and have a smoke, that is fine, but as a non-smoker, I should also be getting "go outside and relax for a few minutes" breaks.
Non smoking employees of big companies were complaining that smoking employees were getting more break times than non smoking employees. The smoking employees defended this extra break time by saying that it wasn't that much time and that it helped them get through the work day. The non smoking employees rebutted that over a year, the smoking employees were getting between 1-3 days off due to the amount of time they spent outside taking smoke breaks.
One of the companies resolved the matter by making the smoking employees take their smoke break time out of their lunch and other break time, while another gave small bonuses to employees that didn't smoke (like an extra few days of paid holiday).
I think that if someone wants to go out and have a smoke, that is fine, but as a non-smoker, I should also be getting "go outside and relax for a few minutes" breaks.
Well speaking personally as a chef (which would be related to the OP) I relish every second of my
smoke break. However, as I've experienced many times before, if I didn't smoke why would I ever
take a break. I guess I got a little cheesed about the example given that they were wasting
company time, because my 3 smoke breaks allot to about 22 min, where it is expected you take an
hour in breaks during a 9 hour work day. 30 min of that is unpaid, so the company is always
making money back on me.
Regardless, I feel smoking is an excellent excuse to get a breath of fresh air (in a sense), or
else I would just run around busting my ass for 8-14 hours a day. I just can't justify sitting
down because then I feel like a little *****, I mean there's always work to be done so hurry
hard! So given all of that nonsense you could only imagine what I would think of somebody playing
Pokemon at work!
smoke break. However, as I've experienced many times before, if I didn't smoke why would I ever
take a break. I guess I got a little cheesed about the example given that they were wasting
company time, because my 3 smoke breaks allot to about 22 min, where it is expected you take an
hour in breaks during a 9 hour work day. 30 min of that is unpaid, so the company is always
making money back on me.
Regardless, I feel smoking is an excellent excuse to get a breath of fresh air (in a sense), or
else I would just run around busting my ass for 8-14 hours a day. I just can't justify sitting
down because then I feel like a little *****, I mean there's always work to be done so hurry
hard! So given all of that nonsense you could only imagine what I would think of somebody playing
Pokemon at work!
1. An addiction should not be an excuse for preferential treatment.Onyx Oblivion said:
2. Agreed (though I'll be elaborating on something in a bit).
3. Agreed. And I laughed. Hard.
The elaboration- firing our fictional gamer friend for suggesting it would have been grounds for unfair termination. He wouldn't have done anything wrong- just make a suggestion.
BUT.
He didn't bring up the idea first. He took the breaks. Therefore, he broke the rules. Therefore, it would be reasonable (if a tad harsh) to fire him.
To put my bit in for the current hot topic in this thread, though, smokers should not get additional breaks on top of regulation breaks just because they got themselves addicted.
Dear god, please elaborate on that before I and many others tear you a new one.Abandon4093 said:
Please show proof that smoking isn't physically addictive. I have friends that are addicted to cigarettes that would say otherwise.
And it better not be "it's the nicotine that's addictive, not the cigarette HAR HAR!"
(For the record, part of me is hoping you aren't as wrong as I think you are for the sake of the current argument in the thread. They would have no excuse for taking smoke breaks of that was the case.)
Interesting.
It kind of depends on context. Was the employee that was playing Pokemon playing it just to make his point of how unfair it is that smokers get extra breaks, or was it solely for the sake of him/her wanting to play Pokemon in the free time he/she did not have?
In case of the former, it is a form of protest. It portrays a scenario that the smokers might have well been playing Pokemon in terms of productivity, and that its a privilage that non-smokers do not have. If he/she got fired were this the case, than the manager's vision is pathetically limited (Manager probably smokes him/herself).
In the latter case, its just truancy, and the Pokemon Trainer got what he/she had coming.
If I had done a protest like that, I would have announced it first. Go to my manager and say "I have observed my smoking collegues, and they get extra breaktime that we non-smokers do not get. To show how unproductive this is, I will play as much Pokemon during work time equal to the time they spend smoking during work hours."
If your boss threatens to fire you at that moment, than you know you have to back off, but you've still made your point.
It kind of depends on context. Was the employee that was playing Pokemon playing it just to make his point of how unfair it is that smokers get extra breaks, or was it solely for the sake of him/her wanting to play Pokemon in the free time he/she did not have?
In case of the former, it is a form of protest. It portrays a scenario that the smokers might have well been playing Pokemon in terms of productivity, and that its a privilage that non-smokers do not have. If he/she got fired were this the case, than the manager's vision is pathetically limited (Manager probably smokes him/herself).
In the latter case, its just truancy, and the Pokemon Trainer got what he/she had coming.
If I had done a protest like that, I would have announced it first. Go to my manager and say "I have observed my smoking collegues, and they get extra breaktime that we non-smokers do not get. To show how unproductive this is, I will play as much Pokemon during work time equal to the time they spend smoking during work hours."
If your boss threatens to fire you at that moment, than you know you have to back off, but you've still made your point.
Except that smokers shouldnt be entitled to smoke breaks either way. it's unfair to the other workers. Smokers have made a choice to START smoking, and if that negatively affects them, its their problem, not their employers. And since its unproductive to let all your workers take the extra break, you should just eliminate them altogether. You can smoke on your lunch breakOnyx Oblivion said:
I entirely agree with this post as well.Fawxy said:
I know some people that get shakes when they don't have their nicotine fix. Like all addictions, your physical body will become affected by withdrawal if your addiction is bad enough.Kakulukia said:
Captcha: oh wait
lol what the hell?