Search:

Custom Search

Readers' Comments

Total Comments: 58
Page 1 of 5

« Previous | Next »

Uncle Sam to Smoking Employees: Quit, Leave or Take the Bus

Smoking

Taxpayer - Public Citizen
Senior Management (your boss!)
Wed Dec 24, 2008 8:30 AM

Post Reply

"or amble, to emulate the Marlboro Man"

Interesting to note that the Marlboro Man (Wayne McLauren - actor who played the Marlboro Cowboy) died at 51 of lung cancer.

You might decide not to emulate him and quit smoking!

What changed?

HR Specialist
Small agency
Wed Dec 24, 2008 8:49 AM

Post Reply

I'm not really sure what this new edict changes. When I was a smoker, the agency I worked for in DC had already implemented this policy. It simply meant I had to go a few steps farther away from the door of the building to have a cigarette. If it was raining, I brought an umbrella. If it was cold, I brought a coat. I still got more work done than any of my other coworkers (I know that complaint will be represented heavily in this forum), and I took fewer sick days. Go figure!

Re: What changed?

analyst
federal
Wed Dec 24, 2008 9:24 AM
Whatever.....

Re: What changed?

Financial Asst
VA
Wed Dec 24, 2008 9:53 AM
Thank you for speaking up...there are still some of us left out there that come in to work with high productivity every day - and smoke. I can count the times on one hand I used sick leave this year (contrary to other office mates that do not smoke) and am greatful for a decent health status. Additionally I would think that most smokers are considerate of those who do not smoke to allow their rights to also be preserved. There will always be exceptions to every situation.

While we all realize that smoking is not good for us, it is an addiction and not easily shaken permanently by most. There are many other things that smokers have no control over (idling vehicles under our windows, high stress levels at work etc) that can/would/will eventually affect our health and potentially make all of us sick too - and those issues, and others, are very much around without a sound being made about them. My question is after this subject is put to rest, what will be targeted next?

Re: What changed?

Civil Servant
VA
Wed Dec 24, 2008 9:55 AM
What changed? I'm with you...nothing. At our agency we have to smoke 40 feet from any entrance. If it were 50 feet from the entrance we'd be standing in the middle of main road with 45 mph traffic.

I love it when non-smokers complain about us while we abide by the 40 foot rule. We quietly stand next to traffic, we watch all the low flying jets going in and out of Midway and O'Hare airports and we even watch all the freight trains hurling smoke out of their engines next to our bldg. while traffic comes to a standstill until the trains pass. It's times like these that I feel shameful that we smokers pollute the outdoors.

Re: What changed?

Aircraft Modifications Manager
USAF
Wed Dec 24, 2008 11:50 AM
Hey Civil Servant, all those trains, plains, autombiles, and factories are performing a useful fuction for which a by product is pollution. And guess what, there are restrictions on how much they can pollute. What useful fuction is pulling pollutants into your lungs serving?

Smoking

Customer Rep
US Forest Service
Wed Dec 24, 2008 9:22 AM

Post Reply

As a smoker I don't think it is right that we are discriminated against. I smoke in my personal vehicle and not even on the grounds. I try to respect others of the second hand smoke, yet who has the right to tell me what I can or can't do in my own vehicle. I agree no smoking in the buildings, however it seems to me that it is my right if I want to die by smoke or another way. I could eat a food and get cancer so let me die the way I want. If people don't smoke then thats great but it does not make them better then me.
I do feel there is alot of discrimination going on with smokers and when I do quit I won't be one of those who have tyrads and fits about those who do. It has come to the point that so many of our rights are being taken away and soon we will be bending to every rule that is made, no matter what it is. So if your not a smoker just remember that soon there will be a rule or law that you won't like either.

Re: Smoking

Aircraft Modifications Manager
USAF
Wed Dec 24, 2008 11:54 AM
So go ahead and smoke. Just do the rest of us a favor and wash the stench off you before you interact with us. oh yeah, and pay your fare share of the medical bills you incur as a direct result of your choice to "smoke and die if you want to."

Re: Smoking

Analyst
Contractor / retired DoD
Wed Dec 24, 2008 12:30 PM
So interesting, all these emotional outbursts! Some of you sound overdue for a 'fix' in order to calm down. If this forum represents a cross-section of our GS workforce with so much misinterpretation of the concept of "rights", then it is a sad commentary. I sure hope you are more level-headed in following rules and regulations of your respective agencies - even when you do not agree personally. As the main article suggestes, times are changing to reflect current knowledge, science, attitudes, etc. DoD implemented the policy many years ago and it managed to survive.

FWIW, I am no longer a smoker and the smoker vs. non-smoker debate is overly melodramatic. However, daily I feel persecuted by co-workers who comment on the smell of anchovies and kimchee I eat for lunch, or that my religion prohibits me from washing my clothes or bathing, or that I consider it funny when I share my flatulence. What about MY rights, eh, you smokers? Where's that union rep??

Re: Smoking

retired
none
Sat Dec 27, 2008 9:22 AM
don't want to buy your used car you smoke in either and they should be labeled too when up for resale. thousands of reasons Smoking Stinks!!!

Re: Smoking

DoD worker
DoD
Mon Jun 22, 2009 9:48 AM
See AF person--here's the thing...those restrictions at issue have absolutely nothing to do with helping you (or other snobs who likely stink in their own way) to avoid someone else's "stench." What-nothing noble like sparing mankind from his/her own poor choices? Okay, just wash yourself before you come see me....If that's the substance of your argument: YOU LOSE completely. How lame!

Re: Smoking

DoD worker
DoD
Mon Jun 22, 2009 9:52 AM
then don't buy the used car....if it's sooo offensive, why would you need it labeled anyway. I agree with Analyst/Contractor (retired DoD). Your issues of "smell" don't pass the sniff test.

Smoking

Biologist
Dept. Interior-USFWS
Wed Dec 24, 2008 9:31 AM

Post Reply

Inspired by the Marlboro man as a child, I smoked for many many (too many) years. Even when I smoked, I could not stand the smell of smoke filled rooms. The stink of smoke and lack of oxygen in such places was offensive even to this pack or two a day smoker. I have smoked in smoking lounges at colleges, airports, office buildings, and even in public schools when I taught science. ALL were as disgusting as they were dangerous. NO one who does not smoke should be exposed in the very least to the smoke of those who do... even if outdoors and far away from buildings. Even the stench of smokers coming in from outdoors is offensive to this ex-smoker. It sticks to their clothes and wafts into offices as they walk by. Addiction to nicotine is powerful. Smoking as means of nicotine delivery is foolhardy and dangerous and expensive to EVERYONE. Whatever it takes, we must fight this disease and regain our health and take control of our lives. More Anti smoking laws can only help.

Re: Smoking

Specialist
Federal Agency
Wed Dec 24, 2008 11:32 AM
Smoking itself is not a disease. If it were health insurance companies would be required to help smokers quit. As for the stench of smokers coming inside, what about the stench of men and women who drown themselves in cologne or perfume daily - this bothers my allergies but no one seems to care about this.

And, as a former smoker you should be a bit more encouraging rather than acting like you are special since you quit. You still smoked and you were the one who did the damage to your lungs, not me.

As for regaining our health, my health is perfect even though I smoke. Health is affected by more than just smoking - drinking, eating too much and being fat, lack of physical exercise, etc.

Go harp with your non-smoker friends!

Re: Smoking

DoD worker
DoD
Mon Jun 22, 2009 9:26 AM
Yeah.... I have to say the "stench" issue doesn't hold any water for obvious reasons. Let's just make up some laws against odorific lunch foods, how often (and well) one must shower, whether some need a poiatrist because their feet stink or another doctor because they suffer from nervous perspiration and "tend to offend"...please. Big question, you are okay with this because you no longer smoke, which is great, really. However, how would you feel if you were being forced to drop some of your OTHER unhealthy, nasty habits? Not sure any of the non-smokers supporting restrictions to the extent you say would be so gratuitous with our freedom to choose if it impacted their personal choices. You want something bad (restrictions), you just might get it bad (we all lose the ability to choose).

Boo Hoo for Smokers

Forest Service
Financial Analyst
Wed Dec 24, 2008 9:44 AM

Post Reply

How outlandish that smokers want special treatment and accommodations. Why should the union be involved in any negotions and go to the extreme of busing or building shelters? Smokers smoke because they want to and should be more considerate of non-smokers. Their argument of "obese" co-workers has absolutely no merit - what direct affect does an over weight co-worker have on anyone versus blowing smoke in someone's face? Next thing you know drug addicts and alcoholics will be fighting for their rights, too. Where does it ever end?

Re: Boo Hoo for Smokers

Specialist
Federal Agency
Wed Dec 24, 2008 11:33 AM
An obese person does eventually touch all of us when our insurance premiums go up thanks to them having more health issues.

After this issue dies down, maybe the next one tackled will be the drowning in cologne or perfume that affects peoples allergies!

Re: Boo Hoo for Smokers

Brian
SSA
Mon Aug 31, 2009 2:19 PM
LMAO... are you serious?? Smoking is an addiction and instead of taxing the hell out of smokers to pay for YOUR roads and other social programs... how about Cessession programs to help smokers QUIT and stay off cigarettes... We tax one part of the population to benefit others...
I have been trying to quit for years... It's the hardest thing I have EVER had to do...

Smoking

Manager
USDA
Wed Dec 24, 2008 9:50 AM

Post Reply

Many states have laws requiring this - such as Washington State where I live. I haven't seen any dire effects, except the cloud and crowd is a little farther from the door. Still, I appreciate the fact I don't have to work in a place infested with the smell and toxic air caused by smoking.

smoking ban

secretary
USACE
Wed Dec 24, 2008 9:51 AM

Post Reply

it's one 'con' after another...first the feds subsidize tobacco farmers (you know, fifth cousins twice removed), make fortunes on the stuff, then 'con' the hypochondriacs in the civilization that 'smoking' is the cause of every health problem other than pregnancy!
Pity the poor medical pretenders (MDs) when they no longer have 'smoking' to blame...they might have to learn somelthing; and, in the meantime, the nicotine patches used for medical purposes for heart patients cost a great deal more than cigarettes, i.e. more profitable. When I see citizens wearing gas masks to avoid the toxic fumes from automobiles and/or manufacturing or utilities, it might be time to be more concerned about my cigarette smoke!

Total Comments: 58
Page 1 of 5

« Previous | Next »

Add a Comment about this Article

** All fields are required.
Note: Your comments will not show up right away. FedSmith.com selects the most insightful comments from our readers for posting. If selected, your comments will show up in the comments section after they have been reviewed and approved. See our terms of use for more information.