"Smoke Break" is an entitlement??

[cass888]

I simply don't understand why smokers think it's their god given right to just go off on "smoke breaks" at work. We've all seen it, 10 extra mins after lunch, bring a cup of coffee/can of drink out in the middle of work, after/before meetings...etc...

I think their answer will be that they are forced to take the break when they can be puffing and working at the same time.

 

[SneeringTree]

Bro, there will aways be abusers of privileges lah. Let's not generalise and stereotype all smokers. If privilege taken away? Bo bian lor.. just like privilege to smoke in public areas.

Live and let live. Peace.

Very sensible post!

 

[SneeringTree]

This is my opinion.

If the smoker takes too much break and still does not produce what is expected of him, then I would say he is taking things abit too far.

If the smoker takes his smoking break, and yet still able to produce what is expected of him, I do not see anything wrong about that. It's the quality of the productivity, not the quantity.

p/s: I'm a smoker too, but I don't see myself taking advantage of this "entitlement"

No, it's not as simple as that. I think what the poster is suggesting is that such breaks disrupt work with other (non-smoking) colleagues. Just because one can produce what's required does not mean they can have these kinds of breaks. If we allow this kind of argument, non-smokers should be allowed to have "breathing the fresh air" or "stretch legs" or whatever break five/six times during the working day- as long as they fulfill their job requirements.

 

[Ah Guan]

No, it's not as simple as that. I think what the poster is suggesting is that such breaks disrupt work with other (non-smoking) colleagues. Just because one can produce what's required does not mean they can have these kinds of breaks. If we allow this kind of argument, non-smokers should be allowed to have "breathing the fresh air" or "stretch legs" or whatever break five/six times during the working day- as long as they fulfill their job requirements.

You show extreme prejudice against smokers.

What happened?

 

[SneeringTree]

You show extreme prejudice against smokers.

What happened?

No, I am discussing the issue fairly rationally. All workers (smoking or non smoking) take breaks. E.g. toilet breaks, coffee breaks etc. And whatever these breaks are, both smokers and non smokers take them. The difference is that smokers take one additional type of break- smoking break. And they can do this several times in the course of the work day.

The poster is just asking why is this allowed? That is a very valid question.

I think smokers should only smoke during their lunch breaks. Period. It won't kill for them to not smoke for that couple of hours before and after lunch right?

On what grounds can smoker expect/demand smoking breaks? The reasons we've heard from smokers (presumably) thus far are quite infantile: e.g. it makes me solve problems, it allows me to network with colleagues (only smoking colleagues?) etc.

The real reason is that their addiction has been indulgently sanctioned by their work place. Like I said, if I were the boss, I would say no smoking breaks. Smoke before and after work or during lunch. Especially nowadays, with air-conditioned offices, they really have to step out of the building to smoke- spending at least 15 minutes away.

 

[yinyang]

..aways be abusers of privileges lah. Let's not generalise and stereotype all smokers. .. just like privilege to smoke in public areas.
Live and let live. Peace.

Bro SneeringTree, seems a bit agitated, cool down bro, let's keep it a friendly discussion, after all, regardless of what we say here, these bloody smokers will continue

Bros eRRoRist and SneeringTree, we can sympathise with you. Nobody's disagreeing on entitlement and lousy attitude by some outcast smokers (issue here, right?).

Smoking's a bad, unhealthy and even anti-social* habit. *Never mind what camaraderie amongst us puffers allege (in good humour, I think) on inspiration etc. Also, we shd not encroach on ther ppl's smoke free space

Here's another dimension (also in good humour) from a die hard smoker colleague who gets pissed off in kopitiams or starbucks with non-smokers filling up few smoking tables: how's making mandatory for them to smoke in smoking tables?:p:o

Okie, I'd better scram before schrapnel falls

 

[SneeringTree]

Here's another dimension (also in good humour) from a die hard smoker colleague who gets pissed off in kopitiams or starbucks with non-smokers filling up few smoking tables: how's making mandatory for them to smoke in smoking tables?:p:o

Okie, I'd better scram before schrapnel falls

Actually, if there are people who don't mind sitting in the vicinity of smokers, that's fine. Tables should not be "reserved" for smokers. The yellow zone simply mean that smoking is allowed there. It does not mean that only smokers can sit there or those who sit there must definitely smoke. Tell your friend this. In any case, I find it incredibly silly and inconsiderate to sit around and smoke after a meal. Especially if there are people waiting for your table.

I have also seen people smoking WHILE they are eating. That's the most ridiculous thing I've ever seen in my life.

 

[ANDYSIAO14]

ive seen a woman smoke while making love too :p
really....

I have also seen people smoking WHILE they are eating. That's the most ridiculous thing I've ever seen in my life.

 

[Ramseth]

Actually, if there are people who don't mind sitting in the vicinity of smokers, that's fine. Tables should not be "reserved" for smokers. The yellow zone simply mean that smoking is allowed there. It does not mean that only smokers can sit there or those who sit there must definitely smoke. Tell your friend this. In any case, I find it incredibly silly and inconsiderate to sit around and smoke after a meal. Especially if there are people waiting for your table.

I have also seen people smoking WHILE they are eating. That's the most ridiculous thing I've ever seen in my life.

I'm a smoker, but I agree with you. I think all eating tables should be non-smoking. Because, many-a-time, smokers and non-smokers eat together at the same table, e.g. friends at dinners or colleagues at lunch. If smokers really want a puff, they should go to a smoking area that's all-smokers. After all, regardless of whatever enjoyment or satisfaction that smokers derive from smoking, we have face the fact that it's not a natural human activity like eating, and the non-smoker should have the right of way. Smoking in lifts is the worst, but the most common culprits are uncles who have the "nevermind" and "just a while" mentalilty. As a a smoker, I can't stand smoking in lifts too, but it's hard to reason or argue with uncles. What to do? Call police? Surely not a sociable option.

 

[SneeringTree]

ive seen a woman smoke while making love too :p
really....

In porn movie is it? Heheh.

 

[Ah Guan]

No, I am discussing the issue fairly rationally. All workers (smoking or non smoking) take breaks. E.g. toilet breaks, coffee breaks etc. And whatever these breaks are, both smokers and non smokers take them. The difference is that smokers take one additional type of break- smoking break. And they can do this several times in the course of the work day.

The poster is just asking why is this allowed? That is a very valid question.

I think smokers should only smoke during their lunch breaks. Period. It won't kill for them to not smoke for that couple of hours before and after lunch right?

On what grounds can smoker expect/demand smoking breaks? The reasons we've heard from smokers (presumably) thus far are quite infantile: e.g. it makes me solve problems, it allows me to network with colleagues (only smoking colleagues?) etc.

The real reason is that their addiction has been indulgently sanctioned by their work place. Like I said, if I were the boss, I would say no smoking breaks. Smoke before and after work or during lunch. Especially nowadays, with air-conditioned offices, they really have to step out of the building to smoke- spending at least 15 minutes away.

Smoke breaks during working hours are as common as toilet breaks, tea breaks or 5 minute stretching breaks. It is when the body and mind needs rest and refreshment.

Even if a worker is paid by the hour, taking a break is reasonable. Any short recess relaxes the mind and reduces the risk of error.

I don't see why smoke breaks have to be singled out and condemned. Taking too many tea breaks/powder breaks is also wrong...

 

[wendypoh]

It will be easier to have smoke breaks if the CEO is also a smoker

 

[SneeringTree]

I don't see why smoke breaks have to be singled out and condemned. Taking too many tea breaks/powder breaks is also wrong...
[/QUOTE]

Of course taking any breaks excessively is wrong. But smoke break is "special" cos smokers DIE DIE have to take them. And that is presumably on top of whatever other breaks their non smoking colleagues take. Do you see the point the poster is trying to say?

 

[jerry]

Don't forget there are those cooler breaks

 

[tonychat]

I don't see why smoke breaks have to be singled out and condemned. Taking too many tea breaks/powder breaks is also wrong...

Of course taking any breaks excessively is wrong. But smoke break is "special" cos smokers DIE DIE have to take them. And that is presumably on top of whatever other breaks their non smoking colleagues take. Do you see the point the poster is trying to say?[/QUOTE]

Then smokers should get lower pay than non smoker.

 

[SneeringTree]

Of course taking any breaks excessively is wrong. But smoke break is "special" cos smokers DIE DIE have to take them. And that is presumably on top of whatever other breaks their non smoking colleagues take. Do you see the point the poster is trying to say?

Then smokers should get lower pay than non smoker.[/QUOTE]

No, smokers should just smoke before work, after work or during lunch time.

 

[cass888]

Then smokers should get lower pay than non smoker.

No, smokers should just smoke before work, after work or during lunch time.[/quote]

Best is to put them in an isolated smoking room with separate ventilation. Productivity will increase.

 

[Shi Jin]

Work is work, smoke break is smoke break. Work should always come first...unless it's your boss asking you to join him for a smoke No smoker will ever tell his/her boss that it is now his smoke break.

 

[SneeringTree]

No, smokers should just smoke before work, after work or during lunch time.

Best is to put them in an isolated smoking room with separate ventilation. Productivity will increase.[/QUOTE]

Productivity will increase until the smokers fall severely sick.

 

[Ah Guan]

Of course taking any breaks excessively is wrong. But smoke break is "special" cos smokers DIE DIE have to take them. And that is presumably on top of whatever other breaks their non smoking colleagues take. Do you see the point the poster is trying to say?

Smoker, coffee addict or serial toilet goer .... What's the difference in the working world today where employees are judged by deliverables instead of the hours clocked?