OSHA's thoughts?

3/16/2009 1:35:56 PM

oh lord.

Willy Nilly is hopeless.

everybody, if we ignore him, maybe he'll just go away.

3/16/2009 1:45:03 PM

Quote :

"By entering the private property where smoking is going on, you are consenting to being harmed by it"

Quote :

"this is entirely false"

Quote :

"Nope. It's 100% correct. You are wrong."

Quote :

"sorry, i'm not."

Quote :

"Yes, you are. "

My favorite part was where neither of you provided any actual evidence to contradict the other's argument.

3/16/2009 1:49:33 PM

that was on purpose
on my part, at least

3/16/2009 1:50:31 PM

Quote :

"which is clearly apples and oranges. In order to poke someone, you must make contact with them. Emitting hazardous smoke is, and should always be, legally distinct from such cases of assault."

awesome...so i can piss on someone, as long as it's from a distance? perhaps i can throw hydrochloric acid on their face, as long as i don't touch them? how about chlorine gas? i mean, the list goes on and on of things that i can do, by your reasoning...good thing there's no law against leaving anthrax on the break room table, right? after all, not only did i not target anyone in particular, but i 1.) didn't have direct contact with the person and 2.) it's on private property!

you are such a dumb fuck, it's so very sad

[Edited on March 16, 2009 at 1:58 PM. Reason : .]

3/16/2009 1:57:44 PM

^farting on someone might be a better analogy than pissing on someone...to piss on someone you have to deliberately aim at them...but farting just depends on if a gush of wind blows the smell their way or not

3/16/2009 1:59:46 PM

which is why i went to chlorine gas and anthrax

of course i agree that they're silly and outrageous analogies...but so is the assertion that there should never be any laws against anything, since it infringes upon one's personal liberties...or is Willy Nilly gonna come in here and back pedal, pretending that infringing on SOME personal liberties are okay, as long as he agrees with them? it's a crock of horseshit all around, and it's just as much a slippery slope on one side as it is on the other

[Edited on March 16, 2009 at 2:03 PM. Reason : .]

3/16/2009 2:01:36 PM

i'm still caught up on the fact that by setting foot on private property, i'm consenting to be harmed by whatever activities are taking place there.

3/16/2009 2:03:49 PM

^ of course...didn't you know that there is a direct and legal connection between your physical location and EVERYTHING that's going on around you, as long as there's a legal document filed in the county records that says someone owns the property?

step in a bar, get shot in the face, and it's YOUR OWN FAULT...after all, you DID walk into there, didn't you? no one made you...if you don't like it, don't get shot anymore!

[Edited on March 16, 2009 at 2:06 PM. Reason : .]

3/16/2009 2:05:29 PM

lulz i used to smoke weed on my breaks when i worked at the GAP

3/16/2009 2:11:41 PM

Can you work from a laptop?

Try to get one, take it outside and work. Say you're taking a "non-smoking break"

3/16/2009 2:22:13 PM

ah, i once had a boss who bitched because i'd be on my cell talking to my gf for 5 minutes 1-2 times per day...literally no more than 5 minutes and definitely no more than twice a day...he once thought it'd be a good idea to bring it up since he was pissed at something

i told him that as soon as he told the smokers they couldn't have a damn 15-minute smoke break 4-5 times a day, i'd make sure my phone was off...i told him that at least my breaks weren't costing the company extra money in healthcare...he never brought it up again, after that

3/16/2009 2:24:59 PM

^^^
1) this is not chit chat.
2) didn't you get fired from GAP?

3/16/2009 2:31:49 PM

aha, this whole argument is pretty damn silly. I guess this is the good thing about living in NY. You don't come across places where people are allowed to smoke very often. I think I've encountered one since I've been here....and that's a barber shop....and it's the owners that smoke in the back room of the back room.
Can't smoke in any bar, restaurant, bowling alley, or office. Actually, my Lockheed facility has a completely smoke free campus. You can't smoke anywhere inside of the security gates regardless of whether or not you're outside of a building.

Anyway, the whole situation sucks. Anyone who smokes in this type of situation is being more than rude. They should walk their happy ass outside if they just HAVE to have that cig.

Novicane, I don't know how your office is set up.... but maybe you could suggest to your boss that he designate a 'smoking room' far away from where people need to do work.

3/16/2009 4:00:14 PM

Quote :

"nyway, the whole situation sucks. Anyone who smokes in this type of situation is being more than rude. They should walk their happy ass outside if they just HAVE to have that cig."

Bingo, and that is what it boils down to. I'm not going to argue the legality of smoking in privately owned offices... but I am going to say it's common fucking decency to not be smoking in a shared office space setting.

I have NO problem at all in a bar, a restaurant or wherever else it's an accepted place to smoke...

3/16/2009 4:03:56 PM

[Edited on March 16, 2009 at 4:05 PM. Reason : lol]

3/16/2009 4:05:24 PM

just to reiterate something that NyM410 mentioned earlier:

Quote :

"I've never even heard of a reputable job in an office building that allows smoking in the office since I've been out of school..."

.

The only place that I can remember working where smoking was allowed was in restaurants. I thought the days were pretty much gone where people could smoke inside of an office, or light a cigar in a movie theatre.

Also, Novicane, I don't know if you plan on trying to persuade your boss to make your office smoke free or not. But if so, and your company offers health insurance in a group plan to the employees, you might try to work this angle:
Boss, you might be able to get a reduced health insurance rate for us if you can convince the health insurance company that 1) your office is smoke free 2) your employees don't smoke / are enrolled in a smoking cessation program and 3) you offer incentive to employees to stop smoking
My office also does this. It basically works out to Lockheed paying you $50/year if you don't smoke. Not much, but, eh...free money.

3/16/2009 4:11:37 PM

Quote :

"step in a bar, get shot in the face, and it's YOUR OWN FAULT...after all, you DID walk into there, didn't you? no one made you...if you don't like it, don't get shot anymore!"

Hardly, but if you walk into a bar that blares music loud enough to damage your hearing and you stay, and you keep coming back time and time again, then yes, when your hearing goes, it is your fault and you were voluntarily, willfully and consentingly damaging your hearing.

Quote :

"Anyway, the whole situation sucks. Anyone who smokes in this type of situation is being more than rude. They should walk their happy ass outside if they just HAVE to have that cig. "

Or maybe the single new person in the situation should leave if it bothers them instead of expecting society to change to suit their wants.

Look, he has a choice, and he knows he has a choice, its right there in his first post: "I don't want to quit". Well they "don't want to stop smoking" and since he has no right to the job, no right to be in the work place except by permission of the owner and no right to force other people to change just to make him feel more comfortable, his choices are put up with it, lobby the boss for change, or quit.

3/16/2009 6:56:03 PM

Quote :

"Hardly, but if you walk into a bar that blares music loud enough to damage your hearing and you stay, and you keep coming back time and time again, then yes, when your hearing goes, it is your fault and you were voluntarily, willfully and consentingly damaging your hearing."

eh, im pretty sure the guy who wrote the stuff you were quoting would agree with that. He wasnt making the kind of point you are trying to hold him too; he was simply replying to someone earlier proving that you can't simply say that anything that happens to you on someone's property is your own fault for being there basically

3/16/2009 6:58:41 PM

http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/enactedlegislation/sessionlaws/pdf/2007-2008/sl2007-193.pdf

This is House Bill 24, which has been signed into law. This is NC's views on smoking in government buildings.

3/16/2009 7:00:38 PM

Telling the op to quit his job if he doesn't like the smoking is tantamount to telling anyone with a valid safety concern to just leave their job instead of resolving the issue.

You don't like the availability of breathing air in the mines, just quit. You don't like the significant percentage of your coworkers you see mangled by chicken precessing equipment, just quit.

You have a reasonable expectation of safety in any workplace. This is the fucking 21st century. We know that secondhand smoke is harmful. We know that lead is harmful. We know that loud noise is harmful. We limit exposure to those things to provide a decent working environment to people.

3/16/2009 7:18:30 PM

its probably been pointed out, but in case it hasn't i wanted to mention that laws against smoking in the workplace only apply to offices with more than so many people

3/16/2009 7:28:31 PM

^does not apply to government buildings. There is no smoking period end inside government buildings and government vehicles, and the number of occupants does not matter.

3/16/2009 7:44:35 PM

go to hardware store. purchase standard "No Smoking" or "This is a smoke-free building" sign and post in an obvious location.

breathe normally again.

3/16/2009 7:50:15 PM

Does Novicane work in a government building in North Carolina? If not, what the fuck are you talking about?

3/16/2009 7:52:14 PM

Quote :

"no right to force other people to change just to make him feel more comfortable"

it's not a matter of comfort.

3/16/2009 8:18:11 PM

I agree with Willy Nilly and 1337 b4k4 on this one. The OP dude is in the minority, and wants the majority to change to meet his preferences. Perhaps instead of insisting coworkers change their behavior the OP'er should move to somewhere else where the smoke doesn't bother him. Ultimately I think the decision to ban or allow smoking should come down to the boss or owner of the company. It should not be influenced or decided by politicians or whinny non-smokers.

3/16/2009 9:06:10 PM

In an economy like this, if we can't give this guy an office work environment where he doesn't have to sit in smoke to do a job, then we should be prepared as a society to pay whatever gap in pay he is short for having to take some inferior job somewhere else.

There is literally no fucking reason that anyone should have to work in smoke in 200 and fucking 9. Fuck all your private property bullshit, where is the god damn humanity?

3/16/2009 9:13:19 PM

Man, I had no idea there were offices that still allowed smoking in them. That sucks

3/16/2009 9:30:27 PM

Quote :

"The OP dude is in the minority, and wants the majority to change to meet his preferences. "

a different wallpaper on his computer is a matter of "preference"...not wanting to inhale carcinogens in a confined space that is not designed to handle the excessive amount of said carcinogens spewing from a number of inconsiderate and generally stupid people is a matter of physical health and a concern of not being able to do his job efficiently or with a modicum of comfort

there is a difference

3/16/2009 9:51:42 PM

^^^ Yeah, its not societies fault this guy decide to work in a smoke pit. Its a free country,I wish we could keep it that way.

I wish my opinion would actually mater in this case except it doesn't. It is only a matter of time before smoking is banned everywhere. Shit starts in California and rolls down hill. Privately liberties will be extinguished before you know it.

[Edited on March 16, 2009 at 9:56 PM. Reason : ^]

3/16/2009 9:56:23 PM

Quote :

"In an economy like this, if we can't give this guy an office work environment where he doesn't have to sit in smoke to do a job, then we should be prepared as a society to pay whatever gap in pay he is short for having to take some inferior job somewhere else. "

Or pay for his medical ailments lol.

3/16/2009 9:59:29 PM

Quote :

"whinny non-smokers."

Quote :

"It is only a matter of time before smoking is banned everywhere."

i will celebrate when this day comes
i really don't enjoy watching people slowly kill themselves
especially when most of the time i end up picking them up time after time when they get old because their emphysema got bad or their CHF flared up

smokers are a drain on our healthcare system and a waste of resources that could be better utilized in other areas

3/16/2009 10:01:53 PM

^^^^ if every one he works with is so stupid and inconsiderate, second hand smoke should be the least of his worries. Like I said earlier, the situation sucks for him, he has every right to quit or ask to work in another room where there is no smoke.

^ People will die one way or another. We will all eventually become a burden on society regardless if we smoke or not.

3/16/2009 10:12:22 PM

those that smoke generally end up becoming more of a burden for a longer period of time

emphysema is pretty much exclusively a smoker's disease

3/16/2009 10:18:35 PM

No one I know works in a building that allows smoking. No one.

3/16/2009 10:20:00 PM

the argument of banning smoking as a strike against personal liberties is used only by idiots who have trouble thinking for themselves...i doubt many of you would argue for the legalization of, say, regular citizens owning weapons-grade nuclear material, but THAT strike against personal liberty is OKAY...i mean, why have laws at all? why protect anyone from anyone else? it's a personal liberty to do whatever the fuck we want, right?

except, no...the idea behind personal liberties is the right to do whatever the fuck you want AS LONG AS IT DOESN'T NEGATIVELY AFFECT THE LIVES OF OTHERS, which smoking in a place that isn't a fucking airtight phone booth DOES...and while you can be an ass and pretend like it's the OP's fault that he works where he does, the fact of the matter is this doesn't just happen in backwater offices owned by dumbass republicans with a twisted and misguided understanding of freedom, nor is the situation nearly as simple as "just quit if you don't like it"...the FACT is that their actions HURT other people who choose not to engage in that particular cancer game, and they have absolutely NO right to do so if you want the play the personal liberties card

fuck the smokers...since they're obviously not smart enough to keep from killing themselves, and since they feel that it's their right to do the same to others, and since it costs ME money when they do, i'll celebrate the day when they are finally banned for good...if they can't be trusted to make good decisions on their own, i guess we'll just have to make the decision for them (note that i'm not really upset at them killing themselves...i'm upset that it 1.) affects others who choose not to smoke and 2.) it costs me money...for all i care, they can smoke like a stack until they hack their way into an early grave, as long as it doesn't cost me anything, physically or monetarily)

again, it's a slippery slope in BOTH directions..."personal freedom" is a buzzphrase that means jack shit because there will never be total personal freedom...and since there never will be total personal freedom, at what point does the government back off? i'm not saying we should live in a police state (which those who disagree with me like to imply), but i AM saying that some things, this being one of them, should be regulated the UNDENIABLE good of the VAST majority

[Edited on March 16, 2009 at 10:24 PM. Reason : .]

3/16/2009 10:21:15 PM

Quote :

"Telling the op to quit his job if he doesn't like the smoking is tantamount to telling anyone with a valid safety concern to just leave their job instead of resolving the issue. You don't like the availability of breathing air in the mines, just quit. You don't like the significant percentage of your coworkers you see mangled by chicken precessing equipment, just quit. You have a reasonable expectation of safety in any workplace. This is the fucking 21st century. We know that secondhand smoke is harmful. We know that lead is harmful. We know that loud noise is harmful. We limit exposure to those things to provide a decent working environment to people."

Somehow though, I don't think you would be satisfied with the solution if the company bought him a gas mask.

Quote :

"In an economy like this, if we can't give this guy an office work environment where he doesn't have to sit in smoke to do a job, then we should be prepared as a society to pay whatever gap in pay he is short for having to take some inferior job somewhere else."

Why should we? Florescent lights give me and many other people headaches and have other adverse health effects. In this day and age there is no reason that anyone should have to work under harsh lighting conditions, therefore, if I can't have a work environment in the job of my choosing without florescent lighting society should pay whatever gap in pay I'm short for having to take an inferior job someplace else.

Quote :

"not wanting to inhale carcinogens in a confined space that is not designed to handle the excessive amount of said carcinogens spewing from a number of inconsiderate and generally stupid people is a matter of physical health and a concern of not being able to do his job efficiently or with a modicum of comfort there is a difference"

Still doesn't mean he gets to force them to change. Like I said, he's welcome to petition the boss to change the environment, but in the end, its still his choice to work there.

Quote :

"i really don't enjoy watching people slowly kill themselves"

I don't either. Having done that with close family members is the reason I will never smoke a day in my life. That said, I would never dream of using the government to inflict this decision upon other people while I still have a choice in the matter.

Quote :

"No one I know works in a building that allows smoking. No one."

Which certainly seems to suggest the OP has plenty of options out there if the current working environment doesn't suit him.

Quote :

"the FACT is that their actions HURT other people who choose not to engage in that particular cancer game, and they have absolutely NO right to do so if you want the play the personal liberties card"

The FACT is their actions only harm those who chose to be in their general vicinity for extended periods of time over multiple days. But until such time as smokers are a) literally blowing their smoke at you or b) following you around all day, you are given the choice to associate with them and the choice to avoid it if it concerns you.

Quote :

"fuck the smokers...since they're obviously not smart enough to keep from killing themselves, and since they feel that it's their right to do the same to others, and since it costs ME money when they do, i'll celebrate the day when they are finally banned for good...if they can't be trusted to make good decisions on their own, i guess we'll just have to make the decision for them "

Incidentally, that same argument could be used for any number of vices.

Quote :

" it costs me money...for all i care, they can smoke like a stack until they hack their way into an early grave, as long as it doesn't cost me anything, physically or monetarily) "

The solution to this however is not more government regulation and interference (which will cost you more money, and fail miserably (see any government ban on any controlled substance for private use and consumption). The answer is to stop funding them and encourage people to make the correct choices and allow smokers to weed themselves out of society.

Quote :

", at what point does the government back off? i'm not saying we should live in a police state (which those who disagree with me like to imply), but i AM saying that some things, this being one of them, should be regulated the UNDENIABLE good of the VAST majority"

The government backs off at the point where private citizen through legal and private agreements and means are able to control and regulate the situation for themselves. Society and the market is clearly able to solve this problem on their own, or are you honestly suggesting that the only reason that so many places are now smoke free is due only to government regulation and has nothing at all to do with changes in public opinion, agreements between employees and employers and insurance companies trying to shave costs? Almost every person replying in this thread has mentioned they have never worked a day in an office that allowed smoking in doors. Do you really think that's due to government regulation, or do you think that maybe when people want and ask for change, and vote with their feet and money that change actually occurs? Real change comes from taking action, whether that be forming a voluntary union, petitioning the owners, striking, quitting or opening a window even in -20 degree weather and just being an ass. It doesn't come from stamping your feet and demanding that the men with guns come and do it for you.

[Edited on March 16, 2009 at 10:54 PM. Reason : adsf]

3/16/2009 10:50:44 PM

Quote :

"Which certainly seems to suggest the OP has plenty of options out there if the current working environment doesn't suit him."

Yeah, the area is just bursting at the seams with job opportunities

Quote :

"Almost every person replying in this thread has mentioned they have never worked a day in an office that allowed smoking in doors. Do you really think that's due to government regulation"

Actually, a lot of it does have to do with government regulation.

3/16/2009 10:56:54 PM

Quote :

"if they can't be trusted to make good decisions on their own, i guess we'll just have to make the decision for them "

http://www.unitedliberty.org/323/ron-paul-government-cant-protect-people-from-themselves

"Governments cannot protect individuals from themselves. It's just impossible, otherwise they become a tyrannical state." - Ron Paul

Ron Paul FTMFW

3/16/2009 11:04:13 PM

Quote :

"Yeah, the area is just bursting at the seams with job opportunities "

Somehow I think whatever job the OP is doing with just 3 other people who are all holed up in an office smoking all day long he can probably get somewhere else. And if the news is to be believed, all things considered, since this area is still growing (http://www.bizjournals.com/triangle/stories/2009/03/09/daily6.html) I would say while not bursting at the seams that our OP would have a significant chance of finding a job at similar pay in a non smoking environment.

Quote :

"Actually, a lot of it does have to do with government regulation."

Which parts? Smoking bans as law are a relatively new development, starting in about 1999 in select cities, and smoking the work place was in significant decline long before that. The only other major notable regulations would be the FAA ban and the government building bans and the 1994 ban in California.

3/16/2009 11:12:28 PM

cigarettes went up like 2 dollars today...use to be able to get 2 packs at the circle k for 6.41 or so...now its 9.16...but yesterday it went from 7.45 to 9.16

[Edited on March 16, 2009 at 11:14 PM. Reason : .]

3/16/2009 11:13:33 PM

that's a good thing

3/16/2009 11:30:37 PM

Do you guys not see how simple this argument is?

Those of you who don't think smoking should be allowed in the workplace have listed your various reasons, but it mainly boils down to the fact that you don't like smoking.

Those of us who think that smoking should be allowed in the workplace if the powers that be determine that it is acceptable have the legal basis in this argument, and therefore, we win.

In closing.. SMOKE 'EM IF YOU GOT 'EM!

3/16/2009 11:49:33 PM

ha

3/16/2009 11:53:27 PM

Quote :

"Smoking bans as law are a relatively new development,"

Yep, and before then smoking in the workplace was much more common. I remember back in the mid-90s working in an office that allowed smoking. That's why I'm surprised there are still places that do it, because of the smoking bans.

States with statewide smoking bans in the workplace:

Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
DC
Florida
Hawaii
Illinois
Iowa
Louisiana
Maine (which has been around since before the California one)
Maryland
Massachusetts
Minnesota
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Mexico
New York
North Dakota
Ohio
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
South Dakota
Utah
Vermont
Washington

3/17/2009 12:07:30 AM

Quote :

"smokers are a drain on our healthcare system and a waste of resources that could be better utilized in other areas"

fat people are a drain on our healthcare system

Individuals who don't work out are a drain on our healthcare system

People with more than two kids are a drain on our healthcare system

People who have more than two drinks per day are a drain on our healthcare system

Let's ban all this shit too.

3/17/2009 1:17:02 AM

I'm for it, just as soon as an overweight, unemployed, alcoholic parent of three gives me cancer

3/17/2009 1:24:19 AM

Just play some really shitty inappropriate music really loud til they get the point. May not give em cancer but might ruin their concentration and give them headaches in return.

Yay!

3/17/2009 2:04:26 AM

Quote :

"quagmire02: pretty much the same thing with me, though, as i mentioned in the other thread, i don't bitch and moan about bars, pool halls, bowling alleys, etc. because i feel that i have an actual choice about whether to go (also, an evening of inhaling probably won't kill me)...and yes, i realize the same could be said about a person's job (in that, you don't HAVE to work there), but everyone knows they're not the same argument, despite the fact that some in this thread would have you believe that they were"

I just got around to reading this thread, and wow, you are...unlikable.

You don't bitch and moan about bars? Do people not work in bars?

So it's only the office workers--people like you--that you care about?

Smoking in the office is very rare as many people have pointed out, but you manage to get all self-righteous to fight for the rights of a few workers whose industry is fast becoming smoke-free on its own. Meanwhile, you've got no problems with servers being exposed to smoke, effectively maintaining an underclass that is forced to endure threats to their health on behalf of the general public.

[Edited on March 17, 2009 at 2:23 AM. Reason : ]

3/17/2009 2:18:08 AM