| |
|
|
|
|
Share/Bookmark this Topic:
|
| Message |
Author |
by racer
on Thu May 25, 2006 5:34 pm |
|
Can ANYONE tell me what rights I have as a smoker?? Company I work for OVER NIGHT went smoke free because of a city ban in public places.
They did away with our break room,we now have to go outside ,50 ft from the building ,no place to sit or eat or relax. I am assuming that in a couple of months they will be griping about the "liter" from the smokers,and about the group of people out holing up the damn wall.
Does an employer have to supply an area for the smokers to go to?
Do they have to have an area for the NON smokers to take breaks and lunches???? What are the real legals of this???
Thanks |
|
|
racer
Newbie
Joined: May 23, 2006
Posts: 1
|
| |
Back to top |
|
|
| |
|
by seesee
on Fri May 26, 2006 10:07 am |
|
racer wrote: Can ANYONE tell me what rights I have as a smoker?? Company I work for OVER NIGHT went smoke free because of a city ban in public places.
They did away with our break room,we now have to go outside ,50 ft from the building ,no place to sit or eat or relax. I am assuming that in a couple of months they will be griping about the "liter" from the smokers,and about the group of people out holing up the damn wall.
Does an employer have to supply an area for the smokers to go to?
Do they have to have an area for the NON smokers to take breaks and lunches???? What are the real legals of this???
Thanks
Similar situations are happening all over the country. Smokers are now second class citizens and the Gov. and multiple special interest groups have decided it is OK to discriminate against smokers. Unfortunately, there is not much you can physically do if you city has imposed a forced smoking ban. The things you can do are 1) Speak to the company president and explain that the smokers who work at your company have no where to go to relax and have a smoke. It is not fair that nonsmokers have an area and smokers do not. See if they would consider building an area closer to the building, and put some comfortable seats in. 2) Be active in contacting your state's legislators. If you don't give your opinion and speak up, they will never know how you feel. Get as many people as you can to write.
I share your resentment. I think what antismokers have done to our states, cities, towns, and businesses is despicable, not to mention against everything that America stands for. |
|
|
seesee
Enthusiastic Smoker
Joined: May 04, 2005
Posts: 301
|
| |
Back to top |
| |
|
by Torquemeda
on Fri May 26, 2006 12:38 pm |
|
Good points SeeSee, but I hate to say it, there is one problem:
Be active in contacting your state's legislators. If you don't give your opinion and speak up, they will never know how you feel. Get as many people as you can to write.
Most people would rather do nothing...then wonder what the fuck happened when their booze, coffee or 'Nutty bar disappears. |
|
|
Torquemeda
Smoking Lobby Sponsor
Joined: May 23, 2005
Posts: 1089
|
| |
Back to top |
| |
|
by bettie_page
on Sat Jun 03, 2006 9:22 pm |
|
Torq, the only problem with people getting involved with the legislative representitives is that most people don't even understand how their state government works in the first place -- much less have the ambition to get involved. Complacency has been so prevalent for so many years that its become common place - and no one really gives a hoot anymore. As most politicians realize this, it gives them free breeding ground to further their own agendas and their own causes.
It's a shame our government gets further and further away from the premises it was founded on. Our fathers must be proud ---------- NOT. |
|
|
bettie_page
Enthusiastic Smoker
Joined: Feb 24, 2006
Posts: 330
|
| |
Back to top |
| |
|
by DC
on Sat Jun 03, 2006 10:03 pm |
|
Bettie:
Your point is supported by the fact that the FL ban initiative won on one of the smallest voter turnouts in that state's history. 30% or so, I believe.
Part of the reason was that the anti-ban forces were not organized and were blind-sided. If that vote were held today, I believe the result would have been much different.
Actually, that may happen with the constitutional scrubbing move which may either invalidate the initiative or force it to another vote.
It will be interesting to watch. |
|
|
DC
Smokers Rights Activist
Joined: Apr 04, 2005
Posts: 820
Location: MD
|
| |
Back to top |
| |
|
by O2Lover
on Sun Jun 04, 2006 5:36 am |
|
DC wrote: Bettie:
Your point is supported by the fact that the FL ban initiative won on one of the smallest voter turnouts in that state's history. 30% or so, I believe.
Part of the reason was that the anti-ban forces were not organized and were blind-sided. If that vote were held today, I believe the result would have been much different.
Actually, that may happen with the constitutional scrubbing move which may either invalidate the initiative or force it to another vote.
It will be interesting to watch.
It certainly will be. Since 1968, 27 voter-approved amendments have been made to the Florida Constitution, including the ban you reference. As you probably know, there are or were 6 bills before the FL legislature to scrub 6 of those amendments separately. The smoking ban is not among them. There is no bill which would scrub several or all voter-approved amendments under one blanket. One of the more notoriously odd voter-approved amendments pertains to farming pregnant pigs. I don't know the public voting history, but I wonder whether more than 30% of registered voters really cared about this issue. You would think this is a good start in removing less-than-constitutional-type provisions from the constitution. SB 1918 and HB 7165 were introduced for this...uh...pig scrubbing. Both died in May. From what I have read, it will be a tough road for legislators simply to ignore the will of those who were interested enough to vote, regardless of what percentage of voters actually showed up at the polls.
http://florida.sierraclub.org/tracker/SB%201918.html
I don't cite this as being a definitive authority on this scrubbing issue, because the Sierra Club is not neutral and is advocating a position. But it might help those interested in the issue on the way to researching and understanding the process. |
|
|
O2Lover
Smoker
Joined: Jan 20, 2006
Posts: 150
|
| |
Back to top |
| |
|
by Smokinjoe
on Sun Jun 04, 2006 5:27 pm |
|
racer wrote: Can ANYONE tell me what rights I have as a smoker?? Company I work for OVER NIGHT went smoke free because of a city ban in public places.
They did away with our break room,we now have to go outside ,50 ft from the building ,no place to sit or eat or relax. I am assuming that in a couple of months they will be griping about the "liter" from the smokers,and about the group of people out holing up the damn wall.
Does an employer have to supply an area for the smokers to go to?
Do they have to have an area for the NON smokers to take breaks and lunches???? What are the real legals of this???
Thanks
You must have the mistaken impression you live in a free country, well you don't anymore.
Grandfathered freedoms ranging back to the very inception of this country are disappearing left and right, our personal freedoms are under constant attack in this new century from ultra so called "Liberals" with their own Socialist agendas.
Your options are to abide by the new rules, violate them and risk being fired or quit the job, don't blame your employer they are only abiding by the city rules.
Your employer is under no obligation to furnish any of the items you mentioned unless you are union and they are in your contract.
All the law requires is they give you a lunch break period. |
|
|
Smokinjoe
Smoker
Joined: Dec 16, 2004
Posts: 178
Location: New Jersey
|
| |
Back to top |
| |
|
by JRS9000
on Mon Jun 05, 2006 10:21 am |
|
Smokingjoe:
Allow me to tell you about one specific advantage to socialism besides the fact that you can own a business, just as you can with capitalism. It's called national healthcare.
National healthcare (which, unlike all the other industrialized countries in the world, the US doesn't have) removes the burden from the private employer of subsidizing healthcare to his employees.
With me so far? The responsibility is now shifted to the government. That in itself has an adtantage in that there is no wondering which of the thousands of health insurance companies cover what combinations of procedures, drugs, etc.
When subsidized healthcare is removed from the private employer, it prevents him from firing (or not hiring in the first place) smoking employees based on his calculations that smoking employees are costing (or will cost) him too much in healthcare.
Don't private business owners have enough on their plate as it is with all the regulations imposed on them for running their businesses?
So, imagine this scenario. You go sky diving one day and find that your chute has a small hole in it. While it still works, relatively speaking, you hit the ground faster than you should have and you break both your ankles. You're then taken to the local hospital emergency room where, after treatment and a short stay in that hospital, you receive NO BILL or, similarly (as it exists is some countries) the government takes care of 85% of your bill, the remaining 15% left to you, which isn't a problem of course, since you bought a very cheap rider policy, as have many of your fellow citizens, to cover the difference.
How does that sound, so far? Enticing?
Now, let's say you went sky diving in Canada and suffered the same injury. This time your national healthcare would pay for a helicopter ride to bring you back to the US for treatment.
Sound like a good thing?
Remember, the #1 reason why Americans declare bankruptcy in the US is for medical bills. Imagine losing your shirt solely because you got sick or had an accident. That's absurd.
Smokers should be pushing for national healthcare in order to take away an employer's right to fire based on a smoking employee's healthcare costs linked to his smoking. |
|
|
JRS9000
Enthusiastic Smoker
Joined: Oct 04, 2005
Posts: 648
|
| |
Back to top |
| |
|
by Smokinjoe
on Tue Jun 06, 2006 12:49 pm |
|
JRS,
Not sure where you are going with this, promoting Socialism?
I am not concerned with healthcare as I have earned mine in return for 30 years of working for the same employer.
I have never been a burden on this healthcare in spite of being a smoker, never had any surgeries or hospitalization and use no/zero/zip prescription drugs contrary to the bean counters calculations.
The poor get their healthcare free financed with taxes imposed on healthcare plans.
I associate Socialism with Communism largely because Russians were always considered Commies even though they were in fact Socialists.
I feel the can all be lumped into one category of Big Brother is watching and controlling.
You Sir, seem to gloat and applaud while millions of your fellow Americans are having Orwellian restrictions legislated against their personal freedoms, freedoms that I personally could have never imagined being taken away in this country without a single shot being fired.
It seems old Nikita is making good on his threat to bury us.
I have to wonder, what the hell is the matter with you that you would act like this, who will be there for you when they come after freedoms that you cherish? |
|
|
Smokinjoe
Smoker
Joined: Dec 16, 2004
Posts: 178
Location: New Jersey
|
| |
Back to top |
| |
|
by Torquemeda
on Tue Jun 06, 2006 1:11 pm |
|
SmokinJoe:
You Sir, seem to gloat and applaud while millions of your fellow Americans are having Orwellian restrictions legislated against their personal freedoms, freedoms that I personally could have never imagined being taken away in this country without a single shot being fired.
I thought the same thing when mandatory drug-testing became the norm. I knew it was the beginning of something else...I just didn't think it'd be something legal. Do you realize now they are claiming that marijuana is safer than tobacco. During the whole "War on Drugs" of the 80's, the opposite was said.
It seems old Nikita is making good on his threat to bury us.
I was talking to a dude who fled Czechoslovakia in the 80's when it was under communist rule. He said he now sees the same thing happening here that was going on when he fled the communist rule.
The government acts like people are too stupid to decide anything for themselves.
Funny thing is, he said when goes back to Czechoslovakia for a visit, you can pretty much do whatever you want.
Latest news is it appears our diets are on the agenda: http://www.cnn.com/2006/HEALTH/diet.fitness/06/02/restaurants.obesity.ap/index.html
What's next, mandatory workouts?
Maybe Uncle Adolph's gonna get his master race after-all. Of course it'll be diversified and politically correct.
I have to wonder, what the hell is the matter with you that you would act like this, who will be there for you when they come after freedoms that you cherish?
He'll always have that computer in his moms basement. |
|
|
Torquemeda
Smoking Lobby Sponsor
Joined: May 23, 2005
Posts: 1089
|
| |
Back to top |
| |
|
|
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Page 1 of 3
Goto page 1, 2, 3 Next
|
|
|
