Readers' Comments
Total Comments: 31
Page 1 of 3
Page 1 of 3
« Previous | Next »
Thousands of Federal Workers Now Protected from Secondhand Smoke Exposure
Total Comments: 31
Page 1 of 3
Page 1 of 3
« Previous | Next »
Free Email Newsletter
| Close | Change | YTD | |
| G | $13.2033 | +0.0011 | +0.64% |
| F | $13.5947 | +0.0048 | +1.95% |
| C | $13.6927 | -0.0027 | +3.59% |
| S | $17.9723 | +0.0233 | +9.18% |
| I | $18.5302 | +0.1287 | -0.04% |
| Close | Change | YTD | |
| L 2040 | $16.1474 | +0.0291 | +3.28% |
| L 2030 | $15.9136 | +0.0249 | +2.93% |
| L 2020 | $15.6956 | +0.0208 | +2.45% |
| L 2010 | $15.4351 | +0.0080 | +1.41% |
| L Income | $14.0647 | +0.0064 | +1.33% |
Smoke Free America
Social Security Administration
Mon Jun 22, 2009 8:37 AM
Post Reply
Smoking should be prohibited everywhere and smoking areas provided and paid for by the cigarrette manufacturing companies. I work at SSA and to enter the public reception area sometimes a person has to go through a smoke cloud because there are unwanted guests smoking right outside the entrance door. I hope the President gives his approval. Santos Mercado, Mayaguez PR (SSA)
Re: Smoke Free America
Tobacco Lobbyist
Mon Jun 22, 2009 2:53 PM
We can also make war on our enemies by selling them cut rate cigarettes in pretty packages to kill off their young men and women. It is hard to hide from a preditor drone while smoking and our soldier can find them by following the trail of cigarette butts. It is hard to burn a US flag with emphysema.
America, thank you for smoking
Re: Smoke Free America
FAA
Tue Jun 23, 2009 6:20 AM
Finally, a rational thinker among the bunch. Your comment is spot on, although I think you stopped short of brilliance (probably because of the 1000 character limit).
We need to reform health care to remove all treatment of people who failed to care for themselves when they were able (you know, those with lung cancer due to smoking, diabetes due to poor diet and no exercise, heart problems for the same reason, etc.). We could easily balance the budget by removing $600 billion the govt pays (in some form or another) into the health care system each year to take care of these "unfittest" (as Darwin would call them).
Re: Smoke Free America
Tobacco Lobbyist
Tue Jun 23, 2009 12:44 PM
The Council for Tobacco Research has proposed several ways to effectively engage the enemies of America using Tobacco as one part of a diabolical trinity. The other two parts are pornography and alcohol. Imagine what the Islamic world would look like if we continuous beamed pornography via satellite into their countries and paid the drug cartels to smuggle American cigarettes and liquor into their country. This is a WIN-WIN for all but our enemies. Within one generation, our enemies would be like wiped out like the Indians of the plains without the loss of a single US Soldier and at minimum expense. Those that don’t die from lung cancer, then the emphysema and cirrhosis will get then. The ones that are left will be consumed by porn to the point that they won’t want to fight.
Smoke-free
DoD
Mon Jun 22, 2009 9:06 AM
Post Reply
Just curious if the majority would equate an outside smoke are, far away from the general population and building entrances, to be intrusive? As I see it, people who don't smoke, just don't like it when others choose to smoke, because they see it as a nasty habit with avoidable consequences. I do not totally disagree with that; however, this is just one of the several life "choices" that has a negative impact, i.e., nasty and avoidable consequences. If smoking is to be deterred to the greatest extent possible, then why not dictate for everyone what they can/cannot choose that may be unhealthy, such as eating habits, drinking habits, exercising, etc. If the smoke break area is away from areas where non-smokers are, why should anyone be permitted to dictate your use of tobacco? I don't allow people to smoke in my house, but they are certainly free to go outside and puff away.... What say you??
Re: Smoke-free
DFAS Indianapolis
Mon Jun 22, 2009 10:18 AM
Re: Smoke-free
DoD
Mon Jun 22, 2009 11:30 AM
smoke exposure
DOD
Mon Jun 22, 2009 9:14 AM
Post Reply
We haven't been able to smoke within 50 feet of a federal building in years and years. That's why I don't understand this article; I assumed this rule was in effect for ALL federal buildings.
Re: smoke exposure
DOI
Mon Jun 22, 2009 11:28 AM
Re: smoke exposure
FBI
Mon Jun 22, 2009 2:29 PM
GSA Secondhand Smoke Exposure
USACE
Mon Jun 22, 2009 9:49 AM
Post Reply
GSA and other agencies may wish to consider that smoking is an addiction and at some point no longer becomes an elective activity. The lost productivity could affect the smoker's efficiency reports at some point and possibly lead to either an EO complaint or even litigation. At the GSA building where I work, there is a designated smoking area that is set aside far enough that, in almost all cases, the non-smoker has no need to enter and is near enough that there is little lost time in transit to the location. If the President cannot lick his own habit, he should understand that he cannot legislate it out of existence.
Smoke Free
Army
Mon Jun 22, 2009 9:54 AM
Post Reply
Article way too vague. I thought no smoking inside
any Fed bldgs. in effect for several years !? We smoke
outside away from entrance. Besides, you
would have to compete with exhaust fumes downtown here to really have an effect.
At our bldg. the issue has been resolved (many times). Once you get away from the outside bldg. entrance, it is really just a matter of controlling people and not the smoke.
Re: Smoke Free
FedSmith.com
Mon Jun 22, 2009 10:08 AM
http://www.fedsmith.com/article/1803/uncle-sam-smoking-employees-quit-leave-take.html
Smoke-Free Environment
IRS
Mon Jun 22, 2009 11:33 AM
Post Reply
I spent nearly a year to get the IRS to ban smoking in the workplace, including contacting Senator's office and State Attorney General's office. I was ridiculed, harrassed and put down by smokers and management.
Finally, the Attorney General's office made the IRS close the illegal smoking room with little or no ventilation located next to a propane furnace.
I was told that my actions made the IRS look bad, to which I replied IRS made themselves look bad for allowing IRS employees to break the law.
What's next???
Federal Agency
Mon Jun 22, 2009 11:46 AM
Post Reply
So, if this takes place and no more smoking, what will the next big charge to take on? People chewing gum in the workplace? People bathing in perfume in the workplace? As one with allergies, the perfume issue needs to be addressed. I think some government funding should be put into a study to see the effects of smelling bottles of perfume in the office has on my health.
Pretty soon it will probably be against the law to eat what we want.
Outside our bldg there are designated smoke areas. Why do non-smokers insist on walking through them??? There are multiple ways for them to get around without walking through the crowd. I think they do it just to say it affects their health, rather than using their brains and staying away from it.
Re: What's next???
SSA
Fri Jul 17, 2009 9:49 AM