Seems unfair. They have 10 minutes off for every hour. Surely this means that they should earn 16.66666% less than a non-smoker.
2007-08-25 14:24:44 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Business & Finance ➔ Careers & Employment ➔ Other - Careers & Employment
Not if they're only smoking during their 15 minute breaks or lunch time.
2007-08-25 15:51:40 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I understand where you're coming from, and I do think that smokers should have some breaks but 1 very hour seems a bit much. Because if you work for 8 or 9 hours a day with 5 minute smoking break every hour then that equals to 40 or 45 minutes a day spent smoking. Which can really add up. I'm sure other people agree with you, but personally I don't. For me, giving a smoker a break every hour to smoke would be like giving an alcoholic time to drink or giving a sex-addict time to have every hour. It just doesn't seem professional. Maybe every few hours would be better, but I wouldn't give my employers smoke breaks every hour.
2016-05-17 23:27:45 · answer #2 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I used to smoke. I was given the same breaks as everyone else only I smoked during those breaks. Its a really nasty habit.
Currently, our insurance costs are so high in the US, that
smokers are viewed by the employer as a potential health risk (high risk), so they are not likely the ones who get promoted for long term work or for higher pay, because their future illness will decrease productivity and cost the employer disability pay.
.
Non smokers can choose to save more money than non smokers. - So, don't worry about the smokers... Let them be.
I wised up and quit. But, I'm certainly not holier than thou, so I still have friends that smoke and I just don't say anything about it, because they know better.
2007-08-25 14:34:01 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Fortunately for businesses, non-smokers don't take breaks to talk to coworkers or anything like that - they just keep working the entire 60 minutes of every hour. Un-huh. ;-}
scorp964 is WRONG about there being a law in the US that mandates breaks and lunches - there is no such law. It might be given at many work locations, but if so, it's just given by the employer, not by law.
2007-08-25 14:43:42 · answer #4 · answered by Judy 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
I dont know where your from, but here in America, by law, everyone gets a 10-15 minute break in the morning and afternoon, and lunch is either 1/2 hour or a hour. smoker or non smoker
Your right Judy, not all states have laws governing this issue. Here is a link that has a list of the states that do have laws regarding breaks.
http://www.dol.gov/esa/programs/whd/state/rest.htm
2007-08-25 14:36:36 · answer #5 · answered by scorp964 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Although smoking is now considered to be an addiction, it is possible, that a lower wage, for smokers, would be an incentive for them to quit.
2007-08-25 14:36:41 · answer #6 · answered by Beau R 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I don't know of any company that gives "cigarette breaks"!...Where/what company are you talking about. Noone should get any more breaks than the worker that DOESN'T smoke. You either do it on your normal/regular break or you don't do it at all...
2007-08-25 14:37:08 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
NO then you'd want a lower wage for fat people for their lunch breaks then for pre existing conditions for the med visits, or parents for their kid stuff.
2007-08-25 14:33:29 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Yes... I think they should get paid less - Than they couldn't afford to buy cigarettes and everybody would be happy :)
2007-08-25 14:33:05 · answer #9 · answered by VTSOXFAN 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋