everybody sucks

JonnyPistachio

A few years ago I had a terrible experience with a co-worker. I worked in a room with him that was about 250 square feet.. kinda large room. He took so many breaks it drove me crazy though.

But after a few weeks after he was hired, he started wearing sandals and smoking more. These sandals and the combination of his sweaty, stinky feet made my stomach turn. In addition, his clothes were immersed in smoke. As I said before, I am allergic, and found myself mith a headache before lunch everyday. This kid was one day away from getting fired after many, many warnings about his smells and tardiness. He quit the day he was supposed to be fired. I think he sensed it coming.

My point is, even though there are smoking areas, with so many breaks in the day, some people still carry the smoke with them everywhere they go. I know this is getting picky, but it still affects people with allergies. If I were a business owner, I would be forced to think hard about hiring someone with a smoking habit that required a daily/hourly fix.

pandora

JonnyPistachio wrote:

A few years ago I had a terrible experience with a co-worker. I worked in a room with him that was about 250 square feet.. kinda large room. He took so many breaks it drove me crazy though.

But after a few weeks after he was hired, he started wearing sandals and smoking more. These sandals and the combination of his sweaty, stinky feet made my stomach turn. In addition, his clothes were immersed in smoke. As I said before, I am allergic, and found myself mith a headache before lunch everyday. This kid was one day away from getting fired after many, many warnings about his smells and tardiness. He quit the day he was supposed to be fired. I think he sensed it coming.

My point is, even though there are smoking areas, with so many breaks in the day, some people still carry the smoke with them everywhere they go. I know this is getting picky, but it still affects people with allergies. If I were a business owner, I would be forced to think hard about hiring someone with a smoking habit that required a daily/hourly fix.

I would be more concerned with hiring people that are team players, those that work well with others even though thats challenging at times.
If the fellow you mentioned had good work ethic, presented himself well, which you are saying he didn't, but if he did, if the only problem was he smelled of smoke, I would think it would be on you to control your allergy problem.

_

pandora wrote:

scb wrote:

Sorry, Pandora, but I think you're really stretching.

First of all, this is not about controlling other people. I'm all about choice - but that includes my choice to not have to walk through a wall of smoke every time I want to enter or leave my workplace. How can you say you support choice by taking ours away?

Secondly, I have compassion for people smoke. Being fortunate to have never made the choice to start, I know I can't really know what it's like to try to quit. I see my friends & loved ones struggle with this every day and I truly feel for them, which is why I support any efforts designed to support people through this. And I don't even think people who don't want to quit are bad people - I just think I should not have to be adversely affected by their decision. Where's the compassion for those of us who have to be accosted by clouds of smoke throughout our day when we're just minding our own business?

If you were a vegetarian, you wouldn't want to be forced to eat meat in order to get into your office every day. Why should we be forced to breathe smoke?

Third, the fact that smoking is relaxing is not relevant to this conversation. You know what else is relaxing? Fucking. But I don't get to go around fucking in public. And that would be even easier for innocent bystanders to avoid.

Well perhaps we will need plastic walls separating each other soon, little bubbles to move about in
Because you get a whiff of smoke occasionally in open air is that not something you can do for someone else?
If smokers are banned from smoking inside at work, and you say outside too, where do you propose they smoke for the half or more of waking hours of their day that they are away from home? Your answer... who cares let them go without?
I say just give a little it feels good!
No stretch here except the stretch some nonsmokers are proposing to take. It is a stretch from common sense.
I would think a proposal to your office manager to have an additional entrance provided for you and anyone that can't stand a whiff of smoke might be a wonderful compromise.
And to the vegetarian, what if there is no option for veggies? Forced to eat meat because the meat eaters took the veggies away..no place for a vegetarian, no food choices. Same thing just different perspective as to who is in control of another.
I could speak to the sex thing but I think I'll leave that one lie You would have a lot of supporters here for that I think

But I think you make it seem more benign than it is. If I have to frequently walk through other people's smoke, I smell like smoke. It's not a temporary event that is quickly over. The smoke continues to follow me on my clothes and hair. The only way to get it out is to wash my hair and clothes. It costs me about $40 & about 4 hours a month to wash my hair twice a week. If I had to wash it every day that would cost me, what?, an extra $80 & 8 hours a month? So I would lose about $1000 & 12 work-day equivalents every year so others can have the privilege of smoking around me?? How is that benign? How does that infringe on my rights? Why should I be subjected to that? And that's not even considering the extra cost & time of washing my laundry, paying more taxes for people's medical care, feeling nauseated from the smoke, etc. The bottom line is, when people smoke around non-smokers, the non-smokers have to pay for it in many ways. And, no, that's not something I'm willing to do for other people who didn't have the courtesy to not smoke around me to begin with.

And don't even get me started about all the thousands of acres of forest and people's homes that are lost every year where I live due to people flicking cigarettes out of their cars. People actually die fighting these fires. People lose their homes and their lifetime's worth of possessions. I'd love to see someone walk up to the families of the dead firefighters and the people who have lost their homes and the animals who have been displaced and tell them about smokers' rights. :evil:

As for your question about where people smoke - they go to their cars or off the university property. But, truly, it's true that I don't care. We don't have any more obligation to provide smoking areas for people than we have to provide drinking areas, heroin shooting areas, or - yes, I'll say it again - fucking areas. If I have to go without a drink and a lay for 8 hours a day, I don't think it's unreasonable to expect people to go without a smoke. (I know, I know... it's addictive. But so are other things people aren't allowed to do at work. And, like I said, I do everything within my power to help people beat the addiction.)

And do you really think it's a compromise for the taxpayers of my state to pay the millions - probably billions - of dollars it would take to construct entirely new entrances to the hundreds of buildings on this campus? Really?? When we can't afford to provide healthcare to children? We should use the money instead to provide separate entrances for smokers?

Vegetables are required to live. Smoking in my face is not.

Jason P

Nothing so needs reforming as other people's habits - Mark Twain

pandora

scb wrote:

But I think you make it seem more benign than it is. If I have to frequently walk through other people's smoke, I smell like smoke. It's not a temporary event that is quickly over. The smoke continues to follow me on my clothes and hair. The only way to get it out is to wash my hair and clothes. It costs me about $40 & about 4 hours a month to wash my hair twice a week. If I had to wash it every day that would cost me, what?, an extra $80 & 8 hours a month? So I would lose about $1000 & 12 work-day equivalents every year so others can have the privilege of smoking around me?? How is that benign? How does that infringe on my rights? Why should I be subjected to that? And that's not even considering the extra cost & time of washing my laundry, paying more taxes for people's medical care, feeling nauseated from the smoke, etc. The bottom line is, when people smoke around non-smokers, the non-smokers have to pay for it in many ways. And, no, that's not something I'm willing to do for other people who didn't have the courtesy to not smoke around me to begin with.

And don't even get me started about all the thousands of acres of forest and people's homes that are lost every year where I live due to people flicking cigarettes out of their cars. People actually die fighting these fires. People lose their homes and their lifetime's worth of possessions. I'd love to see someone walk up to the families of the dead firefighters and the people who have lost their homes and the animals who have been displaced and tell them about smokers' rights. :evil:

As for your question about where people smoke - they go to their cars or off the university property. But, truly, it's true that I don't care. We don't have any more obligation to provide smoking areas for people than we have to provide drinking areas, heroin shooting areas, or - yes, I'll say it again - fucking areas. If I have to go without a drink and a lay for 8 hours a day, I don't think it's unreasonable to expect people to go without a smoke. (I know, I know... it's addictive. But so are other things people aren't allowed to do at work. And, like I said, I do everything within my power to help people beat the addiction.)

And do you really think it's a compromise for the taxpayers of my state to pay the millions - probably billions - of dollars it would take to construct entirely new entrances to the hundreds of buildings on this campus? Really?? When we can't afford to provide healthcare to children? We should use the money instead to provide separate entrances for smokers?

Vegetables are required to live. Smoking in my face is not.

So the smokers you come in contact with are allowed to smoke outside near entrances of the University you work at I take it....?
This a compromise, good,
but now a little better one could be provided where as perhaps a few entrances or
an area a few feet from certain entrances so perhaps you get that 5 second whiff say 1/4 or even 1/8th as much as now. I'm sure a 5 second whiff isn't going to leave you smelling like anything.
That would be a good compromise. You would think that would be cool correct?
You could compromise and have a little bit of smoke come your way?
Please tell me you are willing to compromise.
That all common sense is not lost, that you understand the rights and needs of the smokers too.
Because this the true issue at hand.

MG79478

pandora wrote:

If an employer has a problem with too many breaks for whatever reason ( and I am an employer) then they just designate break times, no brainer.

It's not so easy if you manage professionals. You can go for days or weeks without actually talking to your direct reports. You can manage people across the country and across the world that you rarely ever see. But because they are professionals, they don't need to be babysat. They are salaried and don't have much oversight. So a designated break time is not a "no brainer". Heaven forbid you have to sit next to one of those ashtrays!

pandora wrote:

That all common sense is not lost, that you understand the rights and needs of the smokers too. Because this the true issue at hand.

Smokers have all the same rights as non-smokers. Smokers should not have any special rights that infringe on the rights of the non smoker. If you choose to smoke, or drink, or whatever, do it so it doesn’t impact others, and follow the laws, or quit.

JonnyPistachio

pandora wrote:

JonnyPistachio wrote:

A few years ago I had a terrible experience with a co-worker. I worked in a room with him that was about 250 square feet.. kinda large room. He took so many breaks it drove me crazy though.

But after a few weeks after he was hired, he started wearing sandals and smoking more. These sandals and the combination of his sweaty, stinky feet made my stomach turn. In addition, his clothes were immersed in smoke. As I said before, I am allergic, and found myself mith a headache before lunch everyday. This kid was one day away from getting fired after many, many warnings about his smells and tardiness. He quit the day he was supposed to be fired. I think he sensed it coming.

My point is, even though there are smoking areas, with so many breaks in the day, some people still carry the smoke with them everywhere they go. I know this is getting picky, but it still affects people with allergies. If I were a business owner, I would be forced to think hard about hiring someone with a smoking habit that required a daily/hourly fix.

I would be more concerned with hiring people that are team players, those that work well with others even though thats challenging at times.
If the fellow you mentioned had good work ethic, presented himself well, which you are saying he didn't, but if he did, if the only problem was he smelled of smoke, I would think it would be on you to control your allergy problem.

Well, he wasnt a good emplyee.
But if he was a good employee, he would have had to go. The office wasnt big enough to move him, and he was infringing on my ability to work. You honestly think that if he was a good emplyee that it would be MY RESPONSIBILITY to control my allergies?! :shock:

pandora

MG79478 wrote:

pandora wrote:

If an employer has a problem with too many breaks for whatever reason ( and I am an employer) then they just designate break times, no brainer.

It's not so easy if you manage professionals. You can go for days or weeks without actually talking to your direct reports. You can manage people across the country and across the world that you rarely ever see. But because they are professionals, they don't need to be babysat. They are salaried and don't have much oversight. So a designated break time is not a "no brainer". Heaven forbid you have to sit next to one of those ashtrays!

pandora wrote:

That all common sense is not lost, that you understand the rights and needs of the smokers too. Because this the true issue at hand.

Smokers have all the same rights as non-smokers. Smokers should not have any special rights that infringe on the rights of the non smoker. If you choose to smoke, or drink, or whatever, do it so it doesn’t impact others, and follow the laws, or quit.

The smokers are smoking in designated areas. They have been banned from smoking in the workplace and in restaurants, bars etc. and yet some will not be satisfied until all right to smoke has been taken from people.
We are talking about people who complain about smokers smoking in their own designated areas. This is wrong and without reason.
What is happening is.... common sense and reason is gone and it is being replaced with hate.
A mind closes to compromise and the heart follows.
As far as the "ashtray" comment ... you didn't just call a person that right?
Hopefully you meant sitting next to someones ashtray, in which case just move it.
Thats what I do if I'm out and about, whats the deal?
I think someone here or somewhere mentioned about complaining.
Complaining becomes a habit, it is the way in which you look at things negatively.
I say try to see things positively.
Next time you see a smoker, give him a tic tac and tell you love em...but mean it!
Or how about just look the other way?

Jeanwah

pandora wrote:

The smokers are smoking in designated areas. They have been banned from smoking in the workplace and in restaurants, bars etc. and yet some will not be satisfied until all right to smoke has been taken from people.
We are talking about people who complain about smokers smoking in their own designated areas. This is wrong and without reason.
What is happening is.... common sense and reason is gone and it is being replaced with hate.
A mind closes to compromise and the heart follows.
As far as the "ashtray" comment ... you didn't just call a person that right?
Hopefully you meant sitting next to someones ashtray, in which case just move it.
Thats what I do if I'm out and about, whats the deal?
I think someone here or somewhere mentioned about complaining.
Complaining becomes a habit, it is the way in which you look at things negatively.
I say try to see things positively.
Next time you see a smoker, give him a tic tac and tell you love em...but mean it!
Or how about just look the other way?

P, you've basically echoed this throughout, but it seems that no one is picking up. What happened to just dealing with people's vices and making our own choices rather than have this need to try and control other people's behavior? And I don't smoke! Live and let live.

pandora

JonnyPistachio wrote:

pandora wrote:

JonnyPistachio wrote:

A few years ago I had a terrible experience with a co-worker. I worked in a room with him that was about 250 square feet.. kinda large room. He took so many breaks it drove me crazy though.

But after a few weeks after he was hired, he started wearing sandals and smoking more. These sandals and the combination of his sweaty, stinky feet made my stomach turn. In addition, his clothes were immersed in smoke. As I said before, I am allergic, and found myself mith a headache before lunch everyday. This kid was one day away from getting fired after many, many warnings about his smells and tardiness. He quit the day he was supposed to be fired. I think he sensed it coming.

My point is, even though there are smoking areas, with so many breaks in the day, some people still carry the smoke with them everywhere they go. I know this is getting picky, but it still affects people with allergies. If I were a business owner, I would be forced to think hard about hiring someone with a smoking habit that required a daily/hourly fix.

I would be more concerned with hiring people that are team players, those that work well with others even though thats challenging at times.
If the fellow you mentioned had good work ethic, presented himself well, which you are saying he didn't, but if he did, if the only problem was he smelled of smoke, I would think it would be on you to control your allergy problem.

Well, he wasnt a good emplyee.
But if he was a good employee, he would have had to go. The office wasnt big enough to move him, and he was infringing on my ability to work. You honestly think that if he was a good emplyee that it would be MY RESPONSIBILITY to control my allergies?! :shock:

Of course, it is you with the health problem, why would it be up to others to keep you well?
Let me ask you..when you say you would not hire an employee who smokes...how about an employer who says no I'm not hiring someone with allergies? No way. Geez that drives me crazy.. coughing, hacking, whatever.
You didn't get this person " gone "cause it was his work performance but you would have been comfortable having him lose his job because you had allergies? because you didn't like the way he smelled? Give me a break.
Thats just wrong. Do you not see the hypocrisy and the total disregard for another?

pandora

Jeanwah wrote:

pandora wrote:

The smokers are smoking in designated areas. They have been banned from smoking in the workplace and in restaurants, bars etc. and yet some will not be satisfied until all right to smoke has been taken from people.
We are talking about people who complain about smokers smoking in their own designated areas. This is wrong and without reason.
What is happening is.... common sense and reason is gone and it is being replaced with hate.
A mind closes to compromise and the heart follows.
As far as the "ashtray" comment ... you didn't just call a person that right?
Hopefully you meant sitting next to someones ashtray, in which case just move it.
Thats what I do if I'm out and about, whats the deal?
I think someone here or somewhere mentioned about complaining.
Complaining becomes a habit, it is the way in which you look at things negatively.
I say try to see things positively.
Next time you see a smoker, give him a tic tac and tell you love em...but mean it!
Or how about just look the other way?

P, you've basically echoed this throughout, but it seems that no one is picking up. What happened to just dealing with people's vices and making our own choices rather than have this need to try and control other people's behavior? And I don't smoke! Live and let live.

Thank you for your short precise perfectly stated words of wisdom, I needed that.. I don't think I'm alone

_

pandora wrote:

scb wrote:

But I think you make it seem more benign than it is. If I have to frequently walk through other people's smoke, I smell like smoke. It's not a temporary event that is quickly over. The smoke continues to follow me on my clothes and hair. The only way to get it out is to wash my hair and clothes. It costs me about $40 & about 4 hours a month to wash my hair twice a week. If I had to wash it every day that would cost me, what?, an extra $80 & 8 hours a month? So I would lose about $1000 & 12 work-day equivalents every year so others can have the privilege of smoking around me?? How is that benign? How does that infringe on my rights? Why should I be subjected to that? And that's not even considering the extra cost & time of washing my laundry, paying more taxes for people's medical care, feeling nauseated from the smoke, etc. The bottom line is, when people smoke around non-smokers, the non-smokers have to pay for it in many ways. And, no, that's not something I'm willing to do for other people who didn't have the courtesy to not smoke around me to begin with.

And don't even get me started about all the thousands of acres of forest and people's homes that are lost every year where I live due to people flicking cigarettes out of their cars. People actually die fighting these fires. People lose their homes and their lifetime's worth of possessions. I'd love to see someone walk up to the families of the dead firefighters and the people who have lost their homes and the animals who have been displaced and tell them about smokers' rights. :evil:

As for your question about where people smoke - they go to their cars or off the university property. But, truly, it's true that I don't care. We don't have any more obligation to provide smoking areas for people than we have to provide drinking areas, heroin shooting areas, or - yes, I'll say it again - fucking areas. If I have to go without a drink and a lay for 8 hours a day, I don't think it's unreasonable to expect people to go without a smoke. (I know, I know... it's addictive. But so are other things people aren't allowed to do at work. And, like I said, I do everything within my power to help people beat the addiction.)

And do you really think it's a compromise for the taxpayers of my state to pay the millions - probably billions - of dollars it would take to construct entirely new entrances to the hundreds of buildings on this campus? Really?? When we can't afford to provide healthcare to children? We should use the money instead to provide separate entrances for smokers?

Vegetables are required to live. Smoking in my face is not.

So the smokers you come in contact with are allowed to smoke outside near entrances of the University you work at I take it....?
This a compromise, good,
but now a little better one could be provided where as perhaps a few entrances or
an area a few feet from certain entrances so perhaps you get that 5 second whiff say 1/4 or even 1/8th as much as now. I'm sure a 5 second whiff isn't going to leave you smelling like anything.
That would be a good compromise. You would think that would be cool correct?
You could compromise and have a little bit of smoke come your way?
Please tell me you are willing to compromise.
That all common sense is not lost, that you understand the rights and needs of the smokers too.
Because this the true issue at hand.

If smokers can do so in a way that doesn't bother other people - whether it be the lasting smell of smoke on the clothes of innocent bystanders, the nausea that some people (myself included) feel when inhaling smoke for even 5 seconds (try inhaling something else horrible for 5 seconds & I think you'll find that 5 seconds isn't as short a time as you seem to think it is), or the exacerbation of illness that occurs when our sick and vulnerable patients have to deal with the secondhand smoke of people who seem to not give a damn - then I don't care what the hell they do. Live and let live, I say. But sometimes "live" for one person interferes with "let live" for others.

But, see, the problem is that these ordinances about staying x number of feet away from entrances has not worked. When we allowed smoking on campus, we had such ordinances - and people still experienced all the things I listed above. Now smoking is banned inside and outside on all of the health sciences campus and all but designated areas on the main campus. (But people still don't have the respect to follow the rules.)

Yes, I am willing to compromise. The compromise is that that I do whatever I want to do in private and smokers can do whatever they want to do in private. I don't want to take away the right of any smoker to smoke. Everyone is still free to smoke 'til their lungs collapse. But, as with many, many other things, they don't have the "right" to do it in a shared public space any more than I have the "right" to shit in a public pool - and shitting is a real biological need. If I want to shit, I have to inconvenience myself to get up into the cold air, go somewhere else, and do it in a private place. And when there is no such private place available - or if I want to be considerate of the other people in the restroom - I have to wait until I get home. Do you think it would be a good compromise for people to be able to shit in a public pool as long as they were x number of feet away from non-shitters?

JonnyPistachio

pandora wrote:

[Of course, it is you with the health problem, why would it be up to others to keep you well?
Let me ask you..when you say you would not hire an employee who smokes...how about an employer who says no I'm not hiring someone with allergies? No way. Geez that drives me crazy.. coughing, hacking, whatever.
You didn't get this person " gone "cause it was his work performance but you would have been comfortable having him lose his job because you had allergies? because you didn't like the way he smelled? Give me a break.
Thats just wrong. Do you not see the hypocrisy and the total disregard for another?

It isnt about others keeping me well, not even close -- its about others making me sick. My allergy to smoke got inflammed because of a choice this other guy made. In the course of 11 years working at the job, that was a miserable two months for me (the other 10 yres and 10 months were great), and it had nothing to do with MY choice, but EVERYTHING to do with his CHOICE. He could chose not to do it during work hours and things would've been a lot better. I asked him nicely to fix it too (many times), to no avail.

If I was in his position, I would not want to infringe on a co-worker who had problems with me. In fact, I used to eat lunch in the same room with the previous employee and he didnt like the smell of some of my food, so I stopped eating lunch there because I didnt want to infringe on him. thats no different -- see, I don't want to offend others around me.

And I would have absolutely no problem with that guy losing his job because of his habit and the smells that are associated with it. It would ultimatley be his choice though. What else would have fixed the problem? should I have worn a doctors mask? maybe a giant bubble? I could shove cotton swabs in my nostrils. Even if I wasnt allergic It would still be a problem.

I do not see any hypocrisy when you are comparing smoking (choice) to allergies (not a choice).. no way.

Hugh Freaking Dillon

scb wrote:

Yes, I am willing to compromise. The compromise is that that I do whatever I want to do in private and smokers can do whatever they want to do in private. I don't want to take away the right of any smoker to smoke. Everyone is still free to smoke 'til their lungs collapse. But, as with many, many other things, they don't have the "right" to do it in a shared public space any more than I have the "right" to shit in a public pool - and shitting is a real biological need. If I want to shit, I have to inconvenience myself to get up into the cold air, go somewhere else, and do it in a private place. And when there is no such private place available - or if I want to be considerate of the other people in the restroom - I have to wait until I get home. Do you think it would be a good compromise for people to be able to shit in a public pool as long as they were x number of feet away from non-shitters?

best ever.

Hugh Freaking Dillon

JonnyPistachio wrote:

If I was in his position, I would not want to infringe on a co-worker who had problems with me. In fact, I used to eat lunch in the same room with the previous employee and he didnt like the smell of some of my food, so I stopped eating lunch there because I didnt want to infringe on him. thats no different -- see, I don't want to offend others around me.

I do not see any hypocrisy when you are comparing smoking (choice) to allergies (not a choice).. no way.

that's an excellent point. About two years ago this chick that sat in the next cube said she was reacting to (what she thought) my cologne. I stopped wearing it. Did I tell her to "piss up a rope"? Nope, I stopped wearing cologne to work and then altogether (even though most people complemented me on it) because it (supposedly) bothered her allergies. Even after she got fired I still don't wear it, just to make sure it doesn't come up again. She still had reactions weeks after I stopped wearing it, so it wasn't me (she even accused me of wearing it when I wasn't), but the point is I conformed to her needs.

Hugh Freaking Dillon

pandora wrote:

Complaining becomes a habit, it is the way in which you look at things negatively.
I say try to see things positively.
Next time you see a smoker, give him a tic tac and tell you love em...but mean it!
Or how about just look the other way?

you DO realize this thread was started by a smoker who thinks everybody sucks, right?

And by the way, if I gave a smoker a tic tac, I'd probably get a punch in the mouth. Try it, I dare you!

pandora

Paul David wrote:

pandora wrote:

Complaining becomes a habit, it is the way in which you look at things negatively.
I say try to see things positively.
Next time you see a smoker, give him a tic tac and tell you love em...but mean it!
Or how about just look the other way?

you DO realize this thread was started by a smoker who thinks everybody sucks, right?

And by the way, if I gave a smoker a tic tac, I'd probably get a punch in the mouth. Try it, I dare you!

Its all in the feel behind it... your heart must be in the right place,
which doesn't seem to be happening here much There is a lot of hate towards the smokers.

Kudos to our OP, with the other smoke hating threads and his title very inventive because each one of us is as imperfect as the next. Although some who posted give the feel that they are better than others.
He makes a valid point about all the obnoxious things to get on, like car fumes.
The non smoking peeps could put some concerns there also instead of exclusively trampling on others who are, by the way, getting with the program.
But I sense, as the smokers probably do, that nothing will be good enough for those obsessed with second hand cigarette smoke.

pandora

JonnyPistachio wrote:

pandora wrote:

[Of course, it is you with the health problem, why would it be up to others to keep you well?
Let me ask you..when you say you would not hire an employee who smokes...how about an employer who says no I'm not hiring someone with allergies? No way. Geez that drives me crazy.. coughing, hacking, whatever.
You didn't get this person " gone "cause it was his work performance but you would have been comfortable having him lose his job because you had allergies? because you didn't like the way he smelled? Give me a break.
Thats just wrong. Do you not see the hypocrisy and the total disregard for another?

It isnt about others keeping me well, not even close -- its about others making me sick. My allergy to smoke got inflammed because of a choice this other guy made. In the course of 11 years working at the job, that was a miserable two months for me (the other 10 yres and 10 months were great), and it had nothing to do with MY choice, but EVERYTHING to do with his CHOICE. He could chose not to do it during work hours and things would've been a lot better. I asked him nicely to fix it too (many times), to no avail.

If I was in his position, I would not want to infringe on a co-worker who had problems with me. In fact, I used to eat lunch in the same room with the previous employee and he didnt like the smell of some of my food, so I stopped eating lunch there because I didnt want to infringe on him. thats no different -- see, I don't want to offend others around me.

And I would have absolutely no problem with that guy losing his job because of his habit and the smells that are associated with it. It would ultimatley be his choice though. What else would have fixed the problem? should I have worn a doctors mask? maybe a giant bubble? I could shove cotton swabs in my nostrils. Even if I wasnt allergic It would still be a problem.

I do not see any hypocrisy when you are comparing smoking (choice) to allergies (not a choice).. no way.

The hypocrisy comes when you yourself would not want to be discriminated against yet you do the same to others. Your life experience has brought you to a point of prejudice.

_

I don't hate the smokers; I hate the smoke.

pandora

scb wrote:

pandora wrote:

scb wrote:

But I think you make it seem more benign than it is. If I have to frequently walk through other people's smoke, I smell like smoke. It's not a temporary event that is quickly over. The smoke continues to follow me on my clothes and hair. The only way to get it out is to wash my hair and clothes. It costs me about $40 & about 4 hours a month to wash my hair twice a week. If I had to wash it every day that would cost me, what?, an extra $80 & 8 hours a month? So I would lose about $1000 & 12 work-day equivalents every year so others can have the privilege of smoking around me?? How is that benign? How does that infringe on my rights? Why should I be subjected to that? And that's not even considering the extra cost & time of washing my laundry, paying more taxes for people's medical care, feeling nauseated from the smoke, etc. The bottom line is, when people smoke around non-smokers, the non-smokers have to pay for it in many ways. And, no, that's not something I'm willing to do for other people who didn't have the courtesy to not smoke around me to begin with.

And don't even get me started about all the thousands of acres of forest and people's homes that are lost every year where I live due to people flicking cigarettes out of their cars. People actually die fighting these fires. People lose their homes and their lifetime's worth of possessions. I'd love to see someone walk up to the families of the dead firefighters and the people who have lost their homes and the animals who have been displaced and tell them about smokers' rights. :evil:

As for your question about where people smoke - they go to their cars or off the university property. But, truly, it's true that I don't care. We don't have any more obligation to provide smoking areas for people than we have to provide drinking areas, heroin shooting areas, or - yes, I'll say it again - fucking areas. If I have to go without a drink and a lay for 8 hours a day, I don't think it's unreasonable to expect people to go without a smoke. (I know, I know... it's addictive. But so are other things people aren't allowed to do at work. And, like I said, I do everything within my power to help people beat the addiction.)

And do you really think it's a compromise for the taxpayers of my state to pay the millions - probably billions - of dollars it would take to construct entirely new entrances to the hundreds of buildings on this campus? Really?? When we can't afford to provide healthcare to children? We should use the money instead to provide separate entrances for smokers?

Vegetables are required to live. Smoking in my face is not.

So the smokers you come in contact with are allowed to smoke outside near entrances of the University you work at I take it....?
This a compromise, good,
but now a little better one could be provided where as perhaps a few entrances or
an area a few feet from certain entrances so perhaps you get that 5 second whiff say 1/4 or even 1/8th as much as now. I'm sure a 5 second whiff isn't going to leave you smelling like anything.
That would be a good compromise. You would think that would be cool correct?
You could compromise and have a little bit of smoke come your way?
Please tell me you are willing to compromise.
That all common sense is not lost, that you understand the rights and needs of the smokers too.
Because this the true issue at hand.

If smokers can do so in a way that doesn't bother other people - whether it be the lasting smell of smoke on the clothes of innocent bystanders, the nausea that some people (myself included) feel when inhaling smoke for even 5 seconds (try inhaling something else horrible for 5 seconds & I think you'll find that 5 seconds isn't as short a time as you seem to think it is), or the exacerbation of illness that occurs when our sick and vulnerable patients have to deal with the secondhand smoke of people who seem to not give a damn - then I don't care what the hell they do. Live and let live, I say. But sometimes "live" for one person interferes with "let live" for others.

But, see, the problem is that these ordinances about staying x number of feet away from entrances has not worked. When we allowed smoking on campus, we had such ordinances - and people still experienced all the things I listed above. Now smoking is banned inside and outside on all of the health sciences campus and all but designated areas on the main campus. (But people still don't have the respect to follow the rules.)

Yes, I am willing to compromise. The compromise is that that I do whatever I want to do in private and smokers can do whatever they want to do in private. I don't want to take away the right of any smoker to smoke. Everyone is still free to smoke 'til their lungs collapse. But, as with many, many other things, they don't have the "right" to do it in a shared public space any more than I have the "right" to shit in a public pool - and shitting is a real biological need. If I want to shit, I have to inconvenience myself to get up into the cold air, go somewhere else, and do it in a private place. And when there is no such private place available - or if I want to be considerate of the other people in the restroom - I have to wait until I get home. Do you think it would be a good compromise for people to be able to shit in a public pool as long as they were x number of feet away from non-shitters?

I think perhaps you have allowed yourself to become too sensitive to the issue of cigarette smoke.
There are so many things in life that are going to be upsetting, like people not following the rules.
But it seems the school is trying to make a good environment for everyone and you may have to concede a bit.
There may always be cigarette smoke around you. I'm assuming because your loved ones smoke as mine do.
Because you love them I'm sure you tolerate it.
You may have to do the same for a stranger at least for now.