counterpoint
November 3rd, 2010, 07:06 PM
This is going to be a lengthy thread, just forewarning you. :)
As of the 1st of November, my place of employment implemented a tobacco free work environment. We were told this a few months in advance, so people took time to either cut down, or quit smoking. However, not everyone did, and of course that's there choice, right?
Let's think about that...
A good example of this would be my mother; her and I work at the same place (she got me the job there :P). She's been a smoker since I was born, and has no intentions of quitting. Those who wanted to continue to smoke were told they couldn't do it on the property, which is perfectly understandable. So, those who smoke, like her, will take their lunch breaks (off the clock, of course) off the company property and smoke their cigarettes. I don't know about everyone, but I know she doesn't leave the butts on the public road or grass. She picks them up and throws them in the garbage. Florida labor law permits two 15 minute breaks within an 8 hour work day, which are to be taken ON the clock. So, smokers would walk off the property to smoke (which is in compliance to what the company wanted with not smoking on the property), but are still on the clock and are not allowed to leave the property, since the company would be liable. That's all perfectly understandable.
So, the question had been brought up several times... 'if I want to smoke on my break, do I have to clock out?' The head of HR decided not to respond, so people assumed it was okay, and walked off the property to smoke. There are so many other non-smokers who walk off the property while on the clock to take walks, or talk on the phone. Why are they not being reprimanded for their bad actions?
So now, the head of HR sent out a very nasty e-mail, saying the smokers are not complying with the rules the company implemented about not smoking on the property (bullshit), and neighboring businesses (the closet business isn't even within sight's distance) are complaining about the smokers leaving trash on public roads and THEIR property. So now, the company is basically saying, "if you smoke, we don't want you to work here."
Should this be deemed a discriminatory act on the company's behalf, saying employees are not allowed to smoke, even when they're willing to clock out on their breaks to do so, or are the smokers not understanding things?
My mom posted this on her Facebook page:
Smokers have become the latest class of American citizens where socially sanctioned discrimination is legally protected and encouraged. Smoking citizens are stripped of their civil or employment rights because in the view of these power grabbers, "categorizing smokers as a protected class trivializes and skews the concept of civil rights."
Then, in a separate comment to someone else:
I am tired of being deemed a second class citizen because I smoke. I respect others rights to not smoke and to not like it. Please respect mine and my personal choices. There are those however who believe they can regulate what I do in my time. If smokers do not stand up and fight their rights, they will soon be told what they can in their own home. Soon you will be told you cannot eat that jelly donut, you must choose an apple. Think it won't go that far? Think again.
So, what do you guys think? Is she the one who is wrong, or is the company facing legal trouble? My mom's thought about forwarding the e-mail from HR to one of the local news stations, to see if this will light the fire under HR's ass to rethink their actions.
Also, if this would be better suited somewhere else, please move it.
As of the 1st of November, my place of employment implemented a tobacco free work environment. We were told this a few months in advance, so people took time to either cut down, or quit smoking. However, not everyone did, and of course that's there choice, right?
Let's think about that...
A good example of this would be my mother; her and I work at the same place (she got me the job there :P). She's been a smoker since I was born, and has no intentions of quitting. Those who wanted to continue to smoke were told they couldn't do it on the property, which is perfectly understandable. So, those who smoke, like her, will take their lunch breaks (off the clock, of course) off the company property and smoke their cigarettes. I don't know about everyone, but I know she doesn't leave the butts on the public road or grass. She picks them up and throws them in the garbage. Florida labor law permits two 15 minute breaks within an 8 hour work day, which are to be taken ON the clock. So, smokers would walk off the property to smoke (which is in compliance to what the company wanted with not smoking on the property), but are still on the clock and are not allowed to leave the property, since the company would be liable. That's all perfectly understandable.
So, the question had been brought up several times... 'if I want to smoke on my break, do I have to clock out?' The head of HR decided not to respond, so people assumed it was okay, and walked off the property to smoke. There are so many other non-smokers who walk off the property while on the clock to take walks, or talk on the phone. Why are they not being reprimanded for their bad actions?
So now, the head of HR sent out a very nasty e-mail, saying the smokers are not complying with the rules the company implemented about not smoking on the property (bullshit), and neighboring businesses (the closet business isn't even within sight's distance) are complaining about the smokers leaving trash on public roads and THEIR property. So now, the company is basically saying, "if you smoke, we don't want you to work here."
Should this be deemed a discriminatory act on the company's behalf, saying employees are not allowed to smoke, even when they're willing to clock out on their breaks to do so, or are the smokers not understanding things?
My mom posted this on her Facebook page:
Smokers have become the latest class of American citizens where socially sanctioned discrimination is legally protected and encouraged. Smoking citizens are stripped of their civil or employment rights because in the view of these power grabbers, "categorizing smokers as a protected class trivializes and skews the concept of civil rights."
Then, in a separate comment to someone else:
I am tired of being deemed a second class citizen because I smoke. I respect others rights to not smoke and to not like it. Please respect mine and my personal choices. There are those however who believe they can regulate what I do in my time. If smokers do not stand up and fight their rights, they will soon be told what they can in their own home. Soon you will be told you cannot eat that jelly donut, you must choose an apple. Think it won't go that far? Think again.
So, what do you guys think? Is she the one who is wrong, or is the company facing legal trouble? My mom's thought about forwarding the e-mail from HR to one of the local news stations, to see if this will light the fire under HR's ass to rethink their actions.
Also, if this would be better suited somewhere else, please move it.