Taxpayer - Public Citizen Senior Management (your boss!) Wed Dec 24, 2008 8:30 AM
"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
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
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
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
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
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
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!
smoking rights
Retired from DHS Wed Dec 24, 2008 9:55 AM
I had a long, confusing comment and I deleted it. I'm a never smoker, spouse went from cigs to pipe to non. Smoking is outside the front and back doors, but I sure wish there were some way to handle this to please all. C'mon all you thinkers and compromisers, get busy!
ban on smoking
Wheelchair Technician Veterans Administration Medical Center Wed Dec 24, 2008 10:02 AM
Again, the problem in this Country of ours is that we want to give rights to everyone for everything...even if it kills us. There is no sense of right or wrong anymore. Everyone is afraid of offending someone.
smoking
acct tech dfas Wed Dec 24, 2008 10:10 AM
when will the propaganda about the alleged dangers of smoking end or be refuted? if the quoted 'official" stats about smoking-releated deaths were in fact true (where are the names of victims), 400,000 out of 55 million smokers mean less than 1/2 of one percent--hardly a "proven fact" but merely number-manipulating. (if I get hit by a car with a cigarette in my mouth, is that smoking=related death?)
Re: smoking
Sr. Staff Energy Wed Dec 24, 2008 12:46 PM
I bet that there is a lawyer out there somewhere who could easily prove it was "suicide", ha!
Re: smoking
Clerk DOI Wed Dec 24, 2008 2:52 PM
At what percentage point would you consider smoker deaths problematic? How many thousands, millions, or billions of casualties must there be before they are no longer meaningless?
Look Around Yourself
Retired BIA Wed Dec 24, 2008 10:16 AM
Re. productivity, how many hours are wasted in a day in giggle-fests in cubicles? Surfing for vacation sites or stock quotes? Playing solitaire? How many long lunch breaks are taken? How often must some employees visit the restroom for who-knows-what? Late? So what - I'll still leave at my regular time. Gossip session? Let me in!!!
I suspect the smoke breaks I used to take (while walking around the building alone) took my allotted break time and helped me avoid the issues I mentioned above so I could concentrate on my work.
Yeah, I was known as a loner and even anti-social but my work was best done solo and without refreshers in who was on the brown list that week....
I've quit smoking since I retired (after two packs a day over about 50 years) and I'll grant you that I'm probably healthier and definitely wealthier (I can just about pay for a vacation in Europe every year with what I save) but I have nothing against smokers who do it responsibly.
Not Just Smoking
retired accountant VAMC Wed Dec 24, 2008 10:36 AM
I quit smoking this past June after 42 years. I like most former smokers tried many times to quit. Congratulations to all of us who made it. Smokers are not criminals - they have found a habit that too easily becomes addictive. Our employee health office made little effort to help smokers. But that's not the only health risk in a hospital setting - the Canteen is loaded with salt and grease. You can get COPD and clog your arteries all in one stop.
Way back when I was in the military, cigarettes were $2.25 a carton. There was a limit on how many cartons you could buy at one time. I believe it was ten. If the government encouraged smoking then, it will have to make a larger effort to rectify the problem now.
Nicotine addiction
Field Examiner VBA Wed Dec 24, 2008 10:41 AM
The idea that the government should hire a bus to take employees out for a smoke break seems like a waste of taxpayer dollars. The employees should have to pay for it, or better yet, they should use nicotine gum patches or other sources of the drug to satisfy cravings at work. The time lost for smoke breaks is totally unfair to the rest of the work force left at their desks working while addicted co-workers satisfy their cravings.
Stinky Perfume
Supervisor MEDCOM Wed Dec 24, 2008 10:50 AM
We focus on smokers and how their habit offends us. I was a smoker when smoking was "fashionable." At that time I was not aware of how much I offended others. I know employees that are actually allergic to smoke. It causes them to have episodes of inability to speak or breath - this does not include those w/asthma or copd. The other offenders not included are those women who insist on taking a bath in their perfumes. I work in public service and cannot tell you how many times I have had migraines from these inconsiderate ladies. It causes me to take my prescribed meds which in turn cause me to become extremely sleepy. I cannot go home because driving w/a migraine is near to impossible. Can signs be put up asking these women not to wear their stinky perfume when visiting public buildings - Federal or not???? I encounter these people in movies, grocery stores, etc.
CONSIDERATE SMOKERS
ENGINEER DOE Wed Dec 24, 2008 11:05 AM
I don't smoke, never have, and am allergic to the smoke. I work in the Federal Building in Richland, WA where smoking has been banned for quite some time. I would like to thank the smokers here for being so courteous & thoughtful of others: they smoke outside under a covered area, but are careful to stay well away from the doors into the building. As for the rest of you, you have my sympathy since obviously you are not lucky enough to be associated with courteous, thoughtful smokers. As to the time away from their desk, well that's a sad reflection on their manager's ability to manage staff if indeed they are taking extra time not allowed to the non-smokers.
2nd Hand Smoke?
Supervisor DoD Wed Dec 24, 2008 11:44 AM
"Reports show" that 2nd hand smoke is as dangerous and contains the same chemicals as "1st" hand smoke. You know anyone addicted to 2nd hand smoke??? I don't ... They couldn't get smokers to stop by telling them it would kill them, make them ugly, or make them sterile, so they enlisted the help of the 2nd hand smokers by telling them they were all going to die! Long ago, no one was offended or allergic to tabacco smoke. Now we all are??? I remember the lady walking past me coughing because I had a cigarette in my mouth (she said she was allergic). To bad she didn't notice that I had not lit it yet! Why not make smoking illegal? That worked well for prohibition ... Where will the government get the tax revenue lost from the sale of cigarettes? Smokers ... lets all not buy any tabacco product for one month ... and watch those that spend our tax dollars squirm!
Re: 2nd Hand Smoke?
Diversity Manager DOL Wed Dec 24, 2008 6:18 PM
I'm sure folks over play the allergy issue, heck just look at all the fed disability claims filed every year they outstrip the military and these are clerk jobs. If the private sector had as many OSHA would be tripled.
Smoking is a choice and its yours to make. The ones i love are the women buying creams for their face to look young when smoking them ages them 12/20 years.
I can just look at someone and tell they are a smoker so why waste the money
Considerate Smokers
Supervisor MEDCOM Wed Dec 24, 2008 12:13 PM
ENGINEER - You are correct some smokers are very considerate and smoke away from others. However, when they come into the building most smell, still have smoke on their clothing and there, at times, is very little difference with the amount of smoke some people have to inhale. Knowing that secondhand smoke is worse, does anyone know if smoke caught on clothing is considered as dangerous as secondhand smoke in the air?? I am all for preserving individual rights, but in this case it goes beyond that.
Smoker Vs. Drinker
Employee DHS Wed Dec 24, 2008 3:04 PM
Lets put smoking into context.......
We do not allow people to consume a drink or two before we get to work. a drink or two mid morning, a drink or two at lunch, than a drink ior two in the afternoon. Why do we make it so easy for mkers to achieve this, when we know the consequences are far worst than than what happens with a drinker.
Have you seen the goverment taking the brewers to court for billions of dollars?
An addiction is an addiction, and the employer has the obligation to support them in quitting, by having the health clinics come on site and issue patches, gum, medication and even hypntherapy to assist employees in quitting if they choose to do that or reduce their consumption of tobacco products.
They say the goverment is a model employeer, show us this is mre than pen to paper. Help your employees become a model employee.
Re: Smoker Vs. Drinker
Diversity Manager DOL Wed Dec 24, 2008 6:20 PM
Tell you what i would be happy to allow them to smoke if you could get CS to put in their 40 hours a week. It takes 2, to be a model employer the employer and employee. Too bad the employees have a long way to go
Time for Feds to Quit Smoking!
Contract Administrator VA Wed Dec 24, 2008 3:12 PM
Smoking should be totally banned in the Federal workplace. Why should we non-smokers be exposed to secondhand smoke and the risk of cancer? It is our rate to work in a cancer-free environment! President Obama must ban smoking now.
Re: Time for Feds to Quit Smoking!
Operations Supervisor DOD-USAF Fri Dec 26, 2008 3:34 PM
---Disgusting habits have no business in a public work place.
---The US Government is under no obligation to provide smokers all these amenities and considerations at the expense of all the other federal employees that don't smoke.
---It is obserd that the tax payers have to pay for buildings to house people that are performing disgusting habits and makeing decsions to intentionally inflect harm to themselves.
---Supervisors (like myself) should be paying very special attention to ensure smokers are not sneaking out during their tour of duty to puff the cancer sticks.
To Paraphrase President Jackson
Meteorologist NOAA Wed Dec 24, 2008 7:51 PM
They have made their ruling, now let them enforce it!
Re: To Paraphrase President Jackson
CIC USAF DOD Thu Dec 25, 2008 12:17 AM
Aw give it a rest, Smoking in the work place has been banned ages ago, people smoke outside away from doors and no one is subject to secondhand smoke...unless they are sucking face with someone out in the smoke-pit.
Bottomline smoking is legal and highly taxed. No one is being harmed except the smoker him/herself and the self righteous people who think smokers should just suddenly quit because they feel they should.
People concerned about excessive smoke breaks should look around at all the time wasted on coffee or the extra long bathroom breaks some folks have.
Re: To Paraphrase President Jackson
HR Specialist USDA Forest Service Mon Dec 29, 2008 10:27 AM
I beg to differ with you, CIC, USAF DOD - I don't "suck face" with smokers, but yet am subjected to their nasty habit every morning when I walk into the building. They stand right next to the entrance, so I get to walk through a cloud of nasty smoke every morning. What really gets me is when they attempt to cover up the stench with cologne/perfume, which only magnifies the disgusting smell. Cig smoke and cologne/perfume don't mix. Disgusting............................
It figures
Civ DOD Thu Dec 25, 2008 1:51 AM
Why do we vote for these a@#10(es! Are there not more important things to worry about! This is how they spend their time!
Freedom
Admin Assistant USMC Mon Dec 29, 2008 7:05 AM
GOD BLESS AMERICA, LAND OF THE FREE! I will choose to smoke, I will smoke whenever and wherever I choose. If non smokers don't like it..too bad. Don't come around me when smoking.
You non smokers have rights too. The right to move away from me.
I practice TOLERANCE every day, all day. Aggressive driving is just one of MY pet peeves. Whiny non-smokers is another...lazy people, stupid people, people who think their peeves are higher on the disgust list than mine....You get the picture?
Re: Freedom
HR Specialist DOL Mon Dec 29, 2008 8:47 AM
Your right to smoke is not unrestricted. If you decided that you had a right to smoke at your desk that was located near mine, I would do my best to see to it that you did not do that again. If your desk where you smoked was near mine, I would not have a right to move away, because I need to be at my desk to do my work. The actions I would take would include everything up to and including having you fired for disobeying a direct order, since the Executive Order issued on this, is a direct order from the President of the United States.
I do not have a problem with smokers going to their designated smoking areas. However when they think they are above the rules and make it difficult for me to do my job, plus making me sick, I would draw the line.
Rights in this country are often restricted. Just like your right to drive is restricted after you drink alcohol. Your rights are restricted when they are in conflict with the rights of others.
Re: Freedom
Reformed Conservative DFAS Mon Dec 29, 2008 8:57 AM
OK, I'll sit around your office and spray skunk oil all day. Since you seem to enjoy stinking up entire rooms, I'm sure you won't object. After all, I have a right to spray skunk oil and no responsibilities. It's all about me!
My Heros
Labor Employee Relations Manager VA Mon Dec 29, 2008 9:18 AM
And the Marlboro cowboy was my hero!
Maybe...
Nameless, Faceless Nobody DOD Mon Dec 29, 2008 10:40 AM
the $ spent on cigarettes could be spent on nicotine patches?
I have a relative who did that to fly internationally and soon ended up quitting, but...did not suffer withdrawal while on a 17 hr flight.
SMOKING BREAKS
UR/QM MEDVAMC Mon Dec 29, 2008 1:07 PM
I used to work in the SICU area, and we each had 2-3 patients to care for. Most of us did not smoke, but on any given shift, there would be 2-3 nurses that did smoke. These nurses would go on their "smoking breaks" 4-5 times during an 8 hour shift. It took them at least 20 minutes away from their patient assignment, which was covered by another staff nurse. By the time you add up 20 minutes times 4, and then 2 fifteen minute breaks, plus a 30 minute lunch break, these people were workjing almost less time than they were taking breaks!!! (And giving a 20 minute time allotment is being very generous on my part...it usually lasted 30 minutes!) You can understand why the rest of us that do not get to go on all these fabulous smoking breaks were indeed, irritated, to say the least. And they almost always wanted to go on a smoking break right before their new surgery patient was due to arrive in the unit....hummmmmm.
RE: Smokers
Clerk EIAT Mon Dec 29, 2008 3:08 PM
Most federal buildings are already sick buildings. Ban hairspray from the can; sodas with so much acid to burn the acid off of battery terminals; all factories that emit smoke or residue within 5 miles of a federal building; combution engines - (checked your lungs lately?)-fingernail removal solutions; mouthwash with alcohol; then tax the devil out of alcohol like you did tobacco. You can drink and drive and cause accidents or kill somebody. Smokers can't even smoke in the same place, and they aren't endangering people on the highways - their minds are not affected due to a cigarette. To the psychologists, psychoanalysts and psychiatrists out there who promulgated with the insurance companies this fiasco, are you sickened by a baby sucking a thumb? Do you have a freudian slip? Or is it your own complex about sucking that really bothers you?
Smoking
CSR IRS Tue Dec 30, 2008 7:52 AM
I wish I knew about the survey on the ban for smoking at the work place. I have been a dedicated smoker for over 20 years. It is a choice I made and continue to make if others will allow me to make that choice. I read some of the comments on smoke breaks and have to say where I work there are NO smoke breaks. Everyone gets two 15 min breaks and a 30 minute lunch. If someone is walking away from work when not on break makes that a issue that management must address and should regardless if it is someone who is smoking or going to get coffee, snacks etc. I can not believe how far people have taken the ban on smoking everywhere. I have people that doesnt even know me come up to me and tell me how bad smoking is for me. Most of the time they are so over weight that I have to think that my smoking is the least of their worries. Smoking may not be good for me but neither is most of the foods that are out there, the air I breath, the water I drink, the medicine I may take. What will be next
All things considered....
Quality Assurance Specialist DCMA Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:42 AM
One things for certain, we're at an impass on what each of us consider a right. All I know is....ban coffee from the workplace, it smells, leaves messes all over, gets on government documents, and have you noticed that when a worker goes to get a cup of coffee, they talk to the people around them. Just imigine the amount of work not getting done due to that coffee. Oh, that includes sodas etc. From the sounds of this forum....good thing weapons are excluded from the workplace.
While at Puget Sound Shipyard the unions and the employer acted responsibly---most of the time. Outside "smoking" areas were established throughout the yard, however the arrogance and ignorance of some smokers was evident in the continued assault upon nonsmokers by those who intentionally disregarded instructions to smoke in these established areas.
Amazingly enough the same assault occurs in public areas. At the Tacoma Mall there are signs by the entrances stating "No Smoking Within 25 Feet". These are continually disregarded by arrogant and/or ignorant smokers who could care less about the effects of their bad habit on innocent passers-by. With the preponderance of scientific and medical evidence against smoking one wonders about the mental condition of those who continue in such a disgusting and expensive habit.
I quit before cigarettes were $1 a pack. I am appalled at those who complain about the economy while lighting up at $6 a pack-a whopping 30 cents a butt.
Re: Arrogant and Ignorant Smokers
Get Real DoD Mon Jun 22, 2009 12:38 PM
Your job probably did more damage to your lungs than any cigarette you smoked. As an insulator you were probably around asbestos and fiberglass - but then you were probably paid $25.00 plus an hour to fill you lungs up with hazardous materials.
All Federal Employees
Technician Department Of The Navy Thu Jan 8, 2009 8:29 PM
So... does this mean we'll see Obama standing 50 feet from the White House on his break?
Uncle Sam to Smoking Employees: Quit, Leave or Tak
specialist VA Mon Jun 22, 2009 8:41 AM
We need much more strict smoking regulations. Many of us have to breathe in second hand smoke while approaching and entering gov't buildings, along with car and bus exhaust. One can only hold his/her breath for so long, and it's not usually long enough to pass through the pollution and the stinks.
Re: Uncle Sam to Smoking Employees: Quit, Leave or Tak
Smokers Voice DoD Mon Jun 22, 2009 12:33 PM
So what is your solution for the fumes from vehicles and factories. Should we ban vehicles and stop manufacturing?????
Chewing Robacco
Area Technician Rural Developmen t Mon Jun 22, 2009 8:56 AM
I agree with the smoking ban, they shoud be made to quit, but what about the employers that chew tobacco while on duty, this should not be allowed.
Who smokers pay for.
Smokers Voice DoD Mon Jun 22, 2009 9:26 AM
Although I do understand those of you who do not smoke and feel that smokers should be treated as second class citizens, please don't forget it's our tax money (imposed on cigarettes) which is paying for all the children you had but didn't think of how you were going to pay for their medical expenses. If you think my cigarette smoke is bad for you, you better quit breathing period. There is more polution that will kill you than my cigarettes. I'm waiting for the smokers to quit, then see if they will start taxing obese people to pay for your children's health care. Be careful, it may come to that.
Smoke Free Workplace
Trench Worker Interior Mon Jun 22, 2009 2:12 PM
I am exposed to second-hand smoke every day. I walk from the Metro station to the Main Interior Bldg. and back to the Metrorail station. I have asthma. I have enough challenges as it is as an asthmatic without having to inhale second-hand smoke to and from work. I am glad that the General Services Administration has put out a new bulletin. How does GSA plan to enforce that bulletin?
I still see employees smoking outside the Main Interior Building every day. The only thing that has changed is the fact that there is no cigarette container for the smokers to dispose of their cigarette butts. They just simply throw the butts on the ground after finishing their smoke break. I am also glad the the FDA will begin regulating what chemicals and tobacco products go into cigarettes. Smoking, as I understand it, is a really hard habit to break. Maybe after the FDA regulates tobacco, it will be easier for Smokers to quit this habit.
Smoking
Senior Management (your boss!)
Wed Dec 24, 2008 8:30 AM
"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?
Small agency
Wed Dec 24, 2008 8:49 AM
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?
federal
Wed Dec 24, 2008 9:24 AM
Re: What changed?
VA
Wed Dec 24, 2008 9:53 AM
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?
VA
Wed Dec 24, 2008 9:55 AM
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?
USAF
Wed Dec 24, 2008 11:50 AM
Smoking
US Forest Service
Wed Dec 24, 2008 9:22 AM
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
USAF
Wed Dec 24, 2008 11:54 AM
Re: Smoking
Contractor / retired DoD
Wed Dec 24, 2008 12:30 PM
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
none
Sat Dec 27, 2008 9:22 AM
Re: Smoking
DoD
Mon Jun 22, 2009 9:48 AM
Re: Smoking
DoD
Mon Jun 22, 2009 9:52 AM
Smoking
Dept. Interior-USFWS
Wed Dec 24, 2008 9:31 AM
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
Federal Agency
Wed Dec 24, 2008 11:32 AM
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
Mon Jun 22, 2009 9:26 AM
Boo Hoo for Smokers
Financial Analyst
Wed Dec 24, 2008 9:44 AM
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
Federal Agency
Wed Dec 24, 2008 11:33 AM
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
SSA
Mon Aug 31, 2009 2:19 PM
I have been trying to quit for years... It's the hardest thing I have EVER had to do...
Smoking
USDA
Wed Dec 24, 2008 9:50 AM
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
USACE
Wed Dec 24, 2008 9:51 AM
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!
smoking rights
DHS
Wed Dec 24, 2008 9:55 AM
I had a long, confusing comment and I deleted it. I'm a never smoker, spouse went from cigs to pipe to non. Smoking is outside the front and back doors, but I sure wish there were some way to handle this to please all. C'mon all you thinkers and compromisers, get busy!
ban on smoking
Veterans Administration Medical Center
Wed Dec 24, 2008 10:02 AM
Again, the problem in this Country of ours is that we want to give rights to everyone for everything...even if it kills us. There is no sense of right or wrong anymore. Everyone is afraid of offending someone.
smoking
dfas
Wed Dec 24, 2008 10:10 AM
when will the propaganda about the alleged dangers of smoking end or be refuted? if the quoted 'official" stats about smoking-releated deaths were in fact true (where are the names of victims), 400,000 out of 55 million smokers mean less than 1/2 of one percent--hardly a "proven fact" but merely number-manipulating. (if I get hit by a car with a cigarette in my mouth, is that smoking=related death?)
Re: smoking
Energy
Wed Dec 24, 2008 12:46 PM
Re: smoking
DOI
Wed Dec 24, 2008 2:52 PM
Look Around Yourself
BIA
Wed Dec 24, 2008 10:16 AM
Re. productivity, how many hours are wasted in a day in giggle-fests in cubicles? Surfing for vacation sites or stock quotes? Playing solitaire? How many long lunch breaks are taken? How often must some employees visit the restroom for who-knows-what? Late? So what - I'll still leave at my regular time. Gossip session? Let me in!!!
I suspect the smoke breaks I used to take (while walking around the building alone) took my allotted break time and helped me avoid the issues I mentioned above so I could concentrate on my work.
Yeah, I was known as a loner and even anti-social but my work was best done solo and without refreshers in who was on the brown list that week....
I've quit smoking since I retired (after two packs a day over about 50 years) and I'll grant you that I'm probably healthier and definitely wealthier (I can just about pay for a vacation in Europe every year with what I save) but I have nothing against smokers who do it responsibly.
Not Just Smoking
VAMC
Wed Dec 24, 2008 10:36 AM
I quit smoking this past June after 42 years. I like most former smokers tried many times to quit. Congratulations to all of us who made it. Smokers are not criminals - they have found a habit that too easily becomes addictive. Our employee health office made little effort to help smokers. But that's not the only health risk in a hospital setting - the Canteen is loaded with salt and grease. You can get COPD and clog your arteries all in one stop.
Way back when I was in the military, cigarettes were $2.25 a carton. There was a limit on how many cartons you could buy at one time. I believe it was ten. If the government encouraged smoking then, it will have to make a larger effort to rectify the problem now.
Nicotine addiction
VBA
Wed Dec 24, 2008 10:41 AM
The idea that the government should hire a bus to take employees out for a smoke break seems like a waste of taxpayer dollars. The employees should have to pay for it, or better yet, they should use nicotine gum patches or other sources of the drug to satisfy cravings at work. The time lost for smoke breaks is totally unfair to the rest of the work force left at their desks working while addicted co-workers satisfy their cravings.
Stinky Perfume
MEDCOM
Wed Dec 24, 2008 10:50 AM
We focus on smokers and how their habit offends us. I was a smoker when smoking was "fashionable." At that time I was not aware of how much I offended others. I know employees that are actually allergic to smoke. It causes them to have episodes of inability to speak or breath - this does not include those w/asthma or copd. The other offenders not included are those women who insist on taking a bath in their perfumes. I work in public service and cannot tell you how many times I have had migraines from these inconsiderate ladies. It causes me to take my prescribed meds which in turn cause me to become extremely sleepy. I cannot go home because driving w/a migraine is near to impossible. Can signs be put up asking these women not to wear their stinky perfume when visiting public buildings - Federal or not???? I encounter these people in movies, grocery stores, etc.
CONSIDERATE SMOKERS
DOE
Wed Dec 24, 2008 11:05 AM
I don't smoke, never have, and am allergic to the smoke. I work in the Federal Building in Richland, WA where smoking has been banned for quite some time. I would like to thank the smokers here for being so courteous & thoughtful of others: they smoke outside under a covered area, but are careful to stay well away from the doors into the building. As for the rest of you, you have my sympathy since obviously you are not lucky enough to be associated with courteous, thoughtful smokers. As to the time away from their desk, well that's a sad reflection on their manager's ability to manage staff if indeed they are taking extra time not allowed to the non-smokers.
2nd Hand Smoke?
DoD
Wed Dec 24, 2008 11:44 AM
"Reports show" that 2nd hand smoke is as dangerous and contains the same chemicals as "1st" hand smoke. You know anyone addicted to 2nd hand smoke??? I don't ... They couldn't get smokers to stop by telling them it would kill them, make them ugly, or make them sterile, so they enlisted the help of the 2nd hand smokers by telling them they were all going to die! Long ago, no one was offended or allergic to tabacco smoke. Now we all are??? I remember the lady walking past me coughing because I had a cigarette in my mouth (she said she was allergic). To bad she didn't notice that I had not lit it yet! Why not make smoking illegal? That worked well for prohibition ... Where will the government get the tax revenue lost from the sale of cigarettes? Smokers ... lets all not buy any tabacco product for one month ... and watch those that spend our tax dollars squirm!
Re: 2nd Hand Smoke?
DOL
Wed Dec 24, 2008 6:18 PM
Smoking is a choice and its yours to make. The ones i love are the women buying creams for their face to look young when smoking them ages them 12/20 years.
I can just look at someone and tell they are a smoker so why waste the money
Considerate Smokers
MEDCOM
Wed Dec 24, 2008 12:13 PM
ENGINEER - You are correct some smokers are very considerate and smoke away from others. However, when they come into the building most smell, still have smoke on their clothing and there, at times, is very little difference with the amount of smoke some people have to inhale. Knowing that secondhand smoke is worse, does anyone know if smoke caught on clothing is considered as dangerous as secondhand smoke in the air?? I am all for preserving individual rights, but in this case it goes beyond that.
Smoker Vs. Drinker
DHS
Wed Dec 24, 2008 3:04 PM
Lets put smoking into context.......
We do not allow people to consume a drink or two before we get to work. a drink or two mid morning, a drink or two at lunch, than a drink ior two in the afternoon. Why do we make it so easy for mkers to achieve this, when we know the consequences are far worst than than what happens with a drinker.
Have you seen the goverment taking the brewers to court for billions of dollars?
An addiction is an addiction, and the employer has the obligation to support them in quitting, by having the health clinics come on site and issue patches, gum, medication and even hypntherapy to assist employees in quitting if they choose to do that or reduce their consumption of tobacco products.
They say the goverment is a model employeer, show us this is mre than pen to paper. Help your employees become a model employee.
Re: Smoker Vs. Drinker
DOL
Wed Dec 24, 2008 6:20 PM
Time for Feds to Quit Smoking!
VA
Wed Dec 24, 2008 3:12 PM
Smoking should be totally banned in the Federal workplace. Why should we non-smokers be exposed to secondhand smoke and the risk of cancer? It is our rate to work in a cancer-free environment! President Obama must ban smoking now.
Re: Time for Feds to Quit Smoking!
DOD-USAF
Fri Dec 26, 2008 3:34 PM
---The US Government is under no obligation to provide smokers all these amenities and considerations at the expense of all the other federal employees that don't smoke.
---It is obserd that the tax payers have to pay for buildings to house people that are performing disgusting habits and makeing decsions to intentionally inflect harm to themselves.
---Supervisors (like myself) should be paying very special attention to ensure smokers are not sneaking out during their tour of duty to puff the cancer sticks.
To Paraphrase President Jackson
NOAA
Wed Dec 24, 2008 7:51 PM
They have made their ruling, now let them enforce it!
Re: To Paraphrase President Jackson
USAF DOD
Thu Dec 25, 2008 12:17 AM
Bottomline smoking is legal and highly taxed. No one is being harmed except the smoker him/herself and the self righteous people who think smokers should just suddenly quit because they feel they should.
People concerned about excessive smoke breaks should look around at all the time wasted on coffee or the extra long bathroom breaks some folks have.
Re: To Paraphrase President Jackson
USDA Forest Service
Mon Dec 29, 2008 10:27 AM
It figures
DOD
Thu Dec 25, 2008 1:51 AM
Why do we vote for these a@#10(es! Are there not more important things to worry about! This is how they spend their time!
Freedom
USMC
Mon Dec 29, 2008 7:05 AM
GOD BLESS AMERICA, LAND OF THE FREE! I will choose to smoke, I will smoke whenever and wherever I choose. If non smokers don't like it..too bad. Don't come around me when smoking.
You non smokers have rights too. The right to move away from me.
I practice TOLERANCE every day, all day. Aggressive driving is just one of MY pet peeves. Whiny non-smokers is another...lazy people, stupid people, people who think their peeves are higher on the disgust list than mine....You get the picture?
Re: Freedom
DOL
Mon Dec 29, 2008 8:47 AM
I do not have a problem with smokers going to their designated smoking areas. However when they think they are above the rules and make it difficult for me to do my job, plus making me sick, I would draw the line.
Rights in this country are often restricted. Just like your right to drive is restricted after you drink alcohol. Your rights are restricted when they are in conflict with the rights of others.
Re: Freedom
DFAS
Mon Dec 29, 2008 8:57 AM
My Heros
VA
Mon Dec 29, 2008 9:18 AM
And the Marlboro cowboy was my hero!
Maybe...
DOD
Mon Dec 29, 2008 10:40 AM
the $ spent on cigarettes could be spent on nicotine patches?
I have a relative who did that to fly internationally and soon ended up quitting, but...did not suffer withdrawal while on a 17 hr flight.
SMOKING BREAKS
MEDVAMC
Mon Dec 29, 2008 1:07 PM
I used to work in the SICU area, and we each had 2-3 patients to care for. Most of us did not smoke, but on any given shift, there would be 2-3 nurses that did smoke. These nurses would go on their "smoking breaks" 4-5 times during an 8 hour shift. It took them at least 20 minutes away from their patient assignment, which was covered by another staff nurse. By the time you add up 20 minutes times 4, and then 2 fifteen minute breaks, plus a 30 minute lunch break, these people were workjing almost less time than they were taking breaks!!! (And giving a 20 minute time allotment is being very generous on my part...it usually lasted 30 minutes!) You can understand why the rest of us that do not get to go on all these fabulous smoking breaks were indeed, irritated, to say the least. And they almost always wanted to go on a smoking break right before their new surgery patient was due to arrive in the unit....hummmmmm.
RE: Smokers
EIAT
Mon Dec 29, 2008 3:08 PM
Most federal buildings are already sick buildings. Ban hairspray from the can; sodas with so much acid to burn the acid off of battery terminals; all factories that emit smoke or residue within 5 miles of a federal building; combution engines - (checked your lungs lately?)-fingernail removal solutions; mouthwash with alcohol; then tax the devil out of alcohol like you did tobacco. You can drink and drive and cause accidents or kill somebody. Smokers can't even smoke in the same place, and they aren't endangering people on the highways - their minds are not affected due to a cigarette. To the psychologists, psychoanalysts and psychiatrists out there who promulgated with the insurance companies this fiasco, are you sickened by a baby sucking a thumb? Do you have a freudian slip? Or is it your own complex about sucking that really bothers you?
Smoking
IRS
Tue Dec 30, 2008 7:52 AM
I wish I knew about the survey on the ban for smoking at the work place. I have been a dedicated smoker for over 20 years. It is a choice I made and continue to make if others will allow me to make that choice. I read some of the comments on smoke breaks and have to say where I work there are NO smoke breaks. Everyone gets two 15 min breaks and a 30 minute lunch. If someone is walking away from work when not on break makes that a issue that management must address and should regardless if it is someone who is smoking or going to get coffee, snacks etc. I can not believe how far people have taken the ban on smoking everywhere. I have people that doesnt even know me come up to me and tell me how bad smoking is for me. Most of the time they are so over weight that I have to think that my smoking is the least of their worries. Smoking may not be good for me but neither is most of the foods that are out there, the air I breath, the water I drink, the medicine I may take. What will be next
All things considered....
DCMA
Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:42 AM
One things for certain, we're at an impass on what each of us consider a right. All I know is....ban coffee from the workplace, it smells, leaves messes all over, gets on government documents, and have you noticed that when a worker goes to get a cup of coffee, they talk to the people around them. Just imigine the amount of work not getting done due to that coffee. Oh, that includes sodas etc. From the sounds of this forum....good thing weapons are excluded from the workplace.
Arrogant and Ignorant Smokers
Puget Sound Naval Shipyard
Wed Dec 31, 2008 1:29 PM
While at Puget Sound Shipyard the unions and the employer acted responsibly---most of the time. Outside "smoking" areas were established throughout the yard, however the arrogance and ignorance of some smokers was evident in the continued assault upon nonsmokers by those who intentionally disregarded instructions to smoke in these established areas.
Amazingly enough the same assault occurs in public areas. At the Tacoma Mall there are signs by the entrances stating "No Smoking Within 25 Feet". These are continually disregarded by arrogant and/or ignorant smokers who could care less about the effects of their bad habit on innocent passers-by. With the preponderance of scientific and medical evidence against smoking one wonders about the mental condition of those who continue in such a disgusting and expensive habit.
I quit before cigarettes were $1 a pack. I am appalled at those who complain about the economy while lighting up at $6 a pack-a whopping 30 cents a butt.
Re: Arrogant and Ignorant Smokers
DoD
Mon Jun 22, 2009 12:38 PM
All Federal Employees
Department Of The Navy
Thu Jan 8, 2009 8:29 PM
So... does this mean we'll see Obama standing 50 feet from the White House on his break?
Uncle Sam to Smoking Employees: Quit, Leave or Tak
VA
Mon Jun 22, 2009 8:41 AM
We need much more strict smoking regulations. Many of us have to breathe in second hand smoke while approaching and entering gov't buildings, along with car and bus exhaust. One can only hold his/her breath for so long, and it's not usually long enough to pass through the pollution and the stinks.
Re: Uncle Sam to Smoking Employees: Quit, Leave or Tak
DoD
Mon Jun 22, 2009 12:33 PM
Chewing Robacco
Rural Developmen t
Mon Jun 22, 2009 8:56 AM
I agree with the smoking ban, they shoud be made to quit, but what about the employers that chew tobacco while on duty, this should not be allowed.
Who smokers pay for.
DoD
Mon Jun 22, 2009 9:26 AM
Although I do understand those of you who do not smoke and feel that smokers should be treated as second class citizens, please don't forget it's our tax money (imposed on cigarettes) which is paying for all the children you had but didn't think of how you were going to pay for their medical expenses. If you think my cigarette smoke is bad for you, you better quit breathing period. There is more polution that will kill you than my cigarettes. I'm waiting for the smokers to quit, then see if they will start taxing obese people to pay for your children's health care. Be careful, it may come to that.
Smoke Free Workplace
Interior
Mon Jun 22, 2009 2:12 PM
I am exposed to second-hand smoke every day. I walk from the Metro station to the Main Interior Bldg. and back to the Metrorail station. I have asthma. I have enough challenges as it is as an asthmatic without having to inhale second-hand smoke to and from work. I am glad that the General Services Administration has put out a new bulletin. How does GSA plan to enforce that bulletin?
I still see employees smoking outside the Main Interior Building every day. The only thing that has changed is the fact that there is no cigarette container for the smokers to dispose of their cigarette butts. They just simply throw the butts on the ground after finishing their smoke break. I am also glad the the FDA will begin regulating what chemicals and tobacco products go into cigarettes. Smoking, as I understand it, is a really hard habit to break. Maybe after the FDA regulates tobacco, it will be easier for Smokers to quit this habit.