Non-smokers deserve more annual leave or pay than smokers.

[ssar]

Quote:

"MANY non-smokers believe they deserve an extra week of annual leave to match the amount of time their smoking colleagues spend on cigarette breaks, Quit Victoria says.

As the federal Health Department prepares to ban staff smoking during work hours or when representing the department, Quit says workplaces should consider offering phone breaks to ring the Quitline in place of smoking breaks."

From:

http://www.smh.com.au/small-business/nonpuffers-call-for-leave-in-lieu-of-smoke-breaks-20100112-m4q4.html

Makes sense.
Let's see more of this kind of thing.

 

[Canteen Worker]

People are free to smoke if it suits them but there is no way their habit should discriminate against other workers in a place of employment.

 

[ssar]

(from elsewhere):

if someone wants a cigarette break, they clock off and have their smoke. Then they clock back on so they don't get paid for the time they take having a smoke. Then let's see how many cigarettes people have a day after they realise they are losing money.

Yes.
Gotta hit 'em where they'll (hopefully) actually take notice - in the wallet.

People with red hair should get less pay than those without red hair. Because they're freaks.

Now yer talkin'.

 

[Fro]

Smokers deserve nothing but contempt.

 

[ManlyBacker]

Smokers deserve nothing but contempt.

As do people who are fat; skinny; have any form of deformity; are sick ; who live out of cities; who live in cities; who drive 4WDs; who weren't born in Australia; are on the dole; women who aim too high; don't have solar panels; anyone who works in advertising, banks, car sales, fossil fuels, bottled water, sugar, meat, fish, plasma tvs; who partake of more than 1.5 drinks a day; parents whose kids that are too noisy; buy goods made more than 10kms away; don't pay tax; eat pizzas or anything that doesn't involve rocket salads in a beetroot jus; and anyone who doesn't support Manly. I'm sure I missed a few but I'm sure you guys can add to the list. 

 

[Fro]

FAIL.

how many of those things are proven to have so many adverse health impacts?

and how many of those directly impact on the people around them so badly when used as they are designed?

the byproduct of smoking is still carcinogenic smoke which ends up in the lungs of those around them, for example the byproduct of Beer is urine, how would smokers like it if people stood around pissing on them???

 

[ManlyBacker]

Beer pissing is an old line and is also a FAIL. How about drinking and road accidents, long-term and short-term health effects, family breakdowns, costs in the judicial system, policing, social services etc etc? Save it until you come up with a decent argument.

 

[Fro]

"directly impact on the people around them so badly when used as they are designed?" was what I said, cars are not designed to run over people, smokes are still designed to exhale poisonous gases.

and the beer pissing was along the sam lines as your rocket salad and non manly supporters line, tongue firmly in cheek

 

[ManlyBacker]

I watched a family member die of lung cancer so I have no love of  tobacco. But there is always a huge list of what is in or out for the hate brigade and I just don't care if people smoke as most don't do it near others. There are more dangerous pollutants coming out of cars, for example, affecting huge numbers of the population but little is done or said about that. Soapboxes and hobby horses are terrific but it gets tedious keeping track of who this week's villians are.

 

[Fro]

Hehe MB tobacco will always be a pet villain of mine.

 

[ManlyBacker]

Ahhh, pet villians, I forgot to add pets to the list...

 

[Fro]

I hate people adding things to lists, I just can't keep track

 

[ManlyBacker]

I've decided to add people who can't spell 'villain' -- *ooops, that'd be me*  :

 

[Chip and Chase]

add...

Men who wear their hair in a ponytail.

 

[Fro]

I dont even classify them as men C & C