Why Smokers Should Get Paid Less Than Non-Smokers

This is really just simple arithmetic but it proves how smokers should be earning less money in the office than a non-smoker doing the same job:

Let’s say a smoker takes two 15-minute smoking breaks. In a big office building, this is probably a little short time-wise: a smoker would need to put his coat on, take an elevator downstairs, go outside, do his or her business, wait for another elevator back upstairs, take their coat off again. It takes significantly longer than 15 minutes in our offices, but let’s just say for argument that they can do it all in 15 minutes. Let’s also say they can manage to productively function in the office with only 2 cigarette breaks in one day.

OK, so two 15 minute cigarette breaks equates to a half-hour of time not doing their job every day. That’s 2.5 hours in a 6-day work week or the equivalent of taking 16.25 days off in a year (over 3 weeks, assuming the smoker works 5-day work weeks). That equates to working 6.25% less than the non-smoker so it is only logical that their salary should be adjusted accordingly.

Our office is currently in the process of debating and facilitating this change. Oddly, we’re getting complaints from the smokers even though there’s no denying the facts when they’re laid out.

But the facts are irrefutable. Aren’t they?

It shouldnt matter if you smoke or not. Each person gets two 15min breaks regardless of if they smoke or not. So no matter how you look at it, EVERYONE is taking up that much time, not just the smokers.


Your company is made up of a bunch of penny pinching #@#@s.

reply to post by jupiter869


How about women that show up to work and head straight to the bathroom to put on their makeup?

Men who pee more than others because of prostate problems?

People who make personal phone calls on company time?

Where does it end? When we all show up for work for grins, and no paycheck?

reply to post by Common Good


Breaks? Who gets breaks these days unless you're in a union. But if you mean taking a break to get a cup of coffee, yeah the smokers take those as well--same as the non-smokers.

I wouldn't call giving smokers 3 weeks of time off "penny pinching"

Haha I used to time my cigarette breaks, from leaving my desk to returning would be 6-8 minutes. OP's idea has been debunked!

No but seriously here in Australia we have Industrial Relation legislation dating back.. er... a while I guess. The standards vary but the standard for a regular 9-5 is 10 minutes break morning and after. It matters not what you do in that 10 minutes.

Having said that the last contract I had (paid per hour) was so boring that I'd have 5-10 smoke breaks during the day. I'd still get more done than anyone else in the same role.

reply to post by jupiter869


While your asshole boss is in his office playing with himself. That's a good time to think of the great loss you are creating by smoking during your break.

Well.

iious to any person of any intelligence at all, the complainers about the -op are smokers....i'm ashamed of ya

And the proponents of OP are non-smokers.

Surprised much?

reply to post by jupiter869


in the army we still get paid even if we take smoke breaks or not. We could have one week of busy work or do overtime and in the end the pay would still be the same as for the ones that hardly work a week at all so thats why we get paid so low every hour because we can work for any of the hours but the results would still be the same.

[edit on 20-2-2010 by Stop-loss!]

When I worked for a branch of the Australian government back in the 90's, we would get morning tea (15 mins), lunch (30 mins) and afternoon tea (15 mins). This was all fair and good. However, it was the smokers that were allowed out for a further 2 smoko breaks per day meaning an extra 10 min break in the morning and afternoon. Some even slipped out for more breaks if management wasn't keeping tabs. Their pays were not docked for the unscheduled breaks and it was considered acceptable because we were in a very stressful environment... ergo, smokers were allowed a smoke to calm the nerves.

Many people thought this was unfair on the non smokers, so a few of us actually started carrying around a packet of cigs (pretending to be smokers) to get the extra breaks. Ridiculous!

Also the office later implemented a policy where office staff could not go outside on their 15 minute tea breaks... except for the smokers of course. So the non smokers were forced to stay inside breathing recycled air and suffering the ills of fluorescent lighting for majority of the day.

Completely unfair!

IRM

reply to post by jupiter869


OH GOD THE SMOKERS ARE DRINKING COFFEE! You do realize that non-smokers and smokers get the same amount of time for breaks right? Unless you work in some awesome office where smokers are not already treated like second class citizens.

Let’s also say they can manage to productively function in the office with only 2 cigarette breaks in one day.

I was able to go whole school days (7+hours) and work days (5:00pm-11:00pm on Friday and saturday) without a single smoke and i was the top performing employee on my shift. Your companies idea is based on generalizations and assumptions. If you want to do this properly you should at least get a third impartial party to come in, time the smokers (and i think you are exaggerating about their time, it doesn't take more than 30 seconds to throw on a jacket and gloves).and cut their pay for engaging in a perfectly legal activity that does not result in the same degree of mind-alteration that cannabis or alcohol use does.

Originally posted by GBP/JPY
iious to any person of any intelligence at all, the complainers about the -op are smokers....i'm ashamed of ya

You caught me! I got PS 94 Turkish export all rolled up in a Bugler paper. Yes I have Job papers, Bali Shag, and I think some Top papers. And Premier tubes for injecting. FF king.

I'm lighting it, I'm smoking it now. Good but perhaps too mild. I'm a sucker for that heavy burly taste like a yanked up skirt. But still.

Originally posted by blerk
And the proponents of OP are non-smokers.

Surprised much?

And the detractors against OP are non-smokers.

Surprised much?

Well, if the ONLY thing you are paying your workers for is merely their time, then yes, that makes sense. However, most jobs require more than merely being present.

Workers should be paid based on their production. What if the smoker is a very effective worker, and stresses over every little detail, completing his job faster and better than his co-workers. Then he goes and indulges in a smoke to relieve some of that stress and re-sharpen his mind WHILE he talks on his cellphone, taking care of some personal business. Maybe the non-smoker isnt as efficient, or maybe he is, but still takes 10 minutes out of the day to take a personal phone call...

It just seems silly to cut salaries of smokers, based on the fact that they will take ~2 fifteen minute breaks each day. As long as they get their work done, isnt that all that matters?

By the way, i dont smoke... i dont see how anyone could enjoy tobacco.

By your rationale, you should also cut salaries to people who go to the bathroom often. Also to people who dont tie their shoes in double knots, because who knows how many times they have to retie their shoes throughout the day, losing precious time...

reply to post by jupiter869

I have never had a job in which I was guaranteed consistent 2 fifteen minute and 1 hour lunch breaks, even though that's the law. Maybe this works for Union employees and those employees in Retail (as an example) but in Corporate... forget about it. If someone gets tagged for doing that consistently, kiss your raise/promotion goodbye.

Frankly, I don't mind it that way. I prefer to have the leeway to show up a little late, leave a little early or take a longer lunch based on the amt. of hours I've put in over the week and that includes work I take home in the evenings (without someone monitoring me by a clock.) Micro-managing and punishing employees is not the road to happy and productive work place. I think this idea will backfire.

ETA: presuming it's even legal.



[edit on 21-2-2010 by LadySkadi]

In the situations i've been in, i'd have to agree on the non-break argument.

In a retail environment, smokers get breaks that are on top of the breaks that non-smokers get. I think this is quite unfair. If they receive those then non-smokers should be granted additional breaks or "fresh air" breaks.

Originally posted by Common Good

It shouldnt matter if you smoke or not. Each person gets two 15min breaks regardless of if they smoke or not. So no matter how you look at it, EVERYONE is taking up that much time, not just the smokers.


Your company is made up of a bunch of penny pinching #@#@s.

Thank you... I smoke.. but not on company time. I was told, "If u smoke, don't take time out to do it". That came from my father... not some corporate head. I don't take "time out" to smoke... I take a lunch when it's possible and nine out of ten times; I don't get a lunch and maybe smoke one cigarette, if that, on a 10-12 hour day. C'mon... don't give me the b.s. that you want to tax me or take more money from me b/c I smoke

Sounds to me like some in here think life is 'just'.
"Its Not Fair" "what about me?"
Get a life.

Funny thing(tome) is the fact that non-smokers are even bitchin about this.
If work ethic is the key to this whole conversation, dont you think you "non-smokers" are or should be sitting in a better off position with all of that extra work you accumulated over the year?(end of sarcasm).

If it really bothers you that much, take up smoking.
If not, quit your bitchin =)
Time to take a 15.

Originally posted by bigsick
In the situations i've been in, i'd have to agree on the non-break argument.

In a retail environment, smokers get breaks that are on top of the breaks that non-smokers get. I think this is quite unfair. If they receive those then non-smokers should be granted additional breaks or "fresh air" breaks.

That's b.s. If your "smokers" are getting more breaks than what everyone else is allotted.. then that's a management issue.. not everyone else's problem.

Another aspect overlooked is the amount of time wasted by work defecation. Lets face it, people aren't pooping at work during their approved #2 time. Hours wasted a week, it isn't fair. I don't crap at work so why should i get paid the same as a work sitter. Not to mention all the shoe tying, shirt retucking, and chair shifting. on average I'd say the average joe works 13.6 hours a week.