Smoking breaks should not be given.

Not exactly. Once again I am not argueing that smoking breaks should not be given. (I know, the thread title is missleading) But more so saying thats a nonsmoker should get just as many breaks as a smoker.

Smoker:Nonsmoker::male:female::black:white

With current laws is this not discrimination. I'm not asking if you personally think we should be able to do this. I'm asking with current laws should both parties get the same break times.

 

Then you should honestly find a workplace with better conditions.

I think he meant that it's segregation to disallow smokers to take a break while non-smokers can, and it's not as simple as, "go and find another job" anyway.



To be honest if I weren't given a break every so often then I probably wouldn't work there, and often, it depends on whether the person smokes or not as to whether it's called a smoking break or just a break. If people at wherever you work ARE getting extra breaks purely for smoking, then you're right, that's bullshit. But if all they get is normal breaks, but they use those breaks to smoke, then what's the problem?

 

Well of course that would be fine!

 

So what is happening? I'm confused :S:S:S:S:S

 

He just said that it'd be fine if they smoked during their regular breaks but they shouldn't be given extra breaks just for it unless the nonsmokers do as well.

 

i think the break "area" should" be atleast a mile walk away, (so people rnt fat) and not near their building at all

 

You've missed countless points that non-smokers DO get 'smoking breaks'. All you have to do is say you wanna take a breather. If they let smokers go smoke, they have to let you do so as well. If they don't, you can report them to the labor board.

Simple as that >.>.

 

I havn't "missed" any points. Non smokers cant take smoking breaks and nor can you report it to labor board because apparently it's legal. Get my point now?

 

No, because your point isn't valid. I've worked at over 6 places within the past 5 years, and I know that you're wrong. In America, if a non-smoker wants to take a smoker break, they can. If the manager doesn't allow a non-smoker to take a smoking break, but allows a smoker to do so, you can contact the labor board, and report the corporation.

Your entire argument is off because you're not correct.

 

I think it has to do with the type of work you do. If you work at McDonald, sure I don't think anyone's going to waste their time arguing.

 

McDonalds, Taco Bell, Wendy's, Burger King, Steak n' Shake, and Peyton's Warehouse (Kroger Distributor) all didn't mind.

And it's not based on the job you're at, it's based on the rules of the job. If smokers get smoking breaks, non-smokers will get smoking breaks. Simple as that. It's a law that they can't discriminate >.>.

If you ask to take a smoke break, and they say you don't smoke, then someone else asks to take a smoke break, and they let them do it, then they broke the law by discriminating.

http://www.dol.gov/dol/allcfr/Title_29/Part_785/29CFR785.18.htm

Smoking Breaks = Rest Breaks. You can ask to go get a cup of coffee, stop for a soda, etc. Usually, these don't last more than 5-20 minutes, and the company may have several regulations on them, but if they allow 1 employee to do it, they're obligated to allow all employees to do it.

 

Thank you that's what the whole debate was:

/debate

 

I feel that is up to the business owner itself, not an individual such as you. Just as some jobs offer coffee breaks because the majority of employees at the location drink coffee. In the United States, an estimated 24.8 million men (23.1 percent) and 21.1 million women (18.3 percent) are smokers, isn't that a large enough amount for the business owner to allow a smoke break if they feel they should?

 

^ Yes, but the debate is over now.

 

Not what the debate was about but ok.......

Ty