Huff and souff make the workers get high


They will meet unceremoniously on the sidewalk outside the office buildings, 3m to the left of the entrance, or to the right or in a nearby alley.

Neither the rain, nor the scorching trails, nor the lightning crashing through the clouds will deter them.

They are a dying breed, the last remaining smokers, who have been unable to suppress their cravings and make time each day from work to satisfy their # 1 craving – a quick but satisfying dose of nicotine.

Take your mind back to the days when workers could smoke at their desks.

Camera iconProfessor Gary Martin Credit: Bruno Kongawoin

As the offices filled with smoke, the anti-smoking siren roared and smokers were banned from designated areas inside buildings, before being chased outside.

Yet a growing number of workers believe that smoking breaks cause resentment among their non-smoking colleagues.

This resentment stems from the fact that smokers are often automatically excused, while others feel they need to justify taking regular breaks.

The somewhat surprising revelation follows the rapid rise of electronic cigarettes and an increased interest in employee well-being.

Some bosses have made it a rule of thumb not to hire those in blowing persuasion, and there is growing anecdotal evidence that unemployed smokers take longer to find jobs than their non-smoking counterparts.

At the top of their list is the perception that regular cigarette breaks lead to a reduction in time spent on the buttocks – or time spent sitting at your desk – to limit the productivity of smokers.

According to the estimates of some bosses, the smokos of a worker in a single year amount to the equivalent of five working days.

Bosses fear their clear-headed, non-puffing staff may demand fairness and ask for extra days of annual leave to reward them for not smoking.

But some non-smoking workers have stood up for their puffy co-workers, suggesting that non-smokers take breaks in another way – to check their social media feed, stretch their legs, or walk away to make a call. private. Ultimately, they say, things balance out.

But bosses leading the charge to move from a smoke-free to a smoke-free workplace also say smokers are generally more unhealthy and take more sick days.

They are also accused of creating smelly problems by causing their smoke to enter the office and an organizational image of poor health, especially when smoking areas are close to the main entrance to the business.

This type of discrimination is not illegal because, unsurprisingly, smokers do not belong to any protected category whatsoever.

Some bosses estimate that a worker’s smokos in a single year amount to the equivalent of a maximum of five working days.

But is it really fair to ban smokers in the workplace?

Probably not, especially if the smoking takes place in an inconspicuous area beyond the office building.

But as many workplaces shift from smoking bans to smoking bans, the growing risk of a bank account drained by having limited employment prospects could ultimately convince those who are puffing to stop for the sake of it. good.

Professor Gary Martin is Managing Director of the Australian Institute of Management WA

Leave A Reply

Your email address will not be published.