Film-Tech Cinema Systems
Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE


  
my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Ground Level   » Employee smoking (Page 2)

 
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3 
 
Author Topic: Employee smoking
Richard Hamilton
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1341
From: Evansville, Indiana
Registered: Jan 2000


 - posted 05-12-2004 12:06 PM      Profile for Richard Hamilton   Email Richard Hamilton   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Aren't most theater employees too young to smoke?

Rick

 |  IP: Logged

Bill Gabel
Film God

Posts: 3873
From: Technicolor / Postworks NY, USA
Registered: Jan 2002


 - posted 05-12-2004 12:29 PM      Profile for Bill Gabel   Email Bill Gabel   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
The New York Post did a story about smokers and how much time they waste in a work day. They watched and studied security tapes and card enters to their building. They found out five people took as many as 15-20 breaks during the day. [Eek!]

 |  IP: Logged

Jeremy Fuentes
Mmmm, Dr. Pepper!

Posts: 1168
From: Corpus Christi, TX United States
Registered: Jan 2004


 - posted 05-12-2004 12:46 PM      Profile for Jeremy Fuentes   Email Jeremy Fuentes   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote: Bill Gabel
They found out five people took as many as 15-20 breaks during the day.
I take way more Film-Tech breaks from my day-time job than that. I'm soo fired!! [thumbsup]

 |  IP: Logged

Randy Stankey
Film God

Posts: 6539
From: Erie, Pennsylvania
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 05-12-2004 04:15 PM      Profile for Randy Stankey   Email Randy Stankey   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Whether you smoke or don't smoke, it's your choice. This is America.

Caveats:

(1) You are 18 or older.
(2) You don't smoke inside.
(3) You don't smoke where customers can see.
(4) Take off your name tag, etc.
(5) You do it on your breaks...

. Where I live, depending on how many hours you work per day, you can get as much as one hour of complete "off-time" lunch break and one 15 minute "rest break". Use as you see fit. If you don't need a full hour you can spend the rest of your (contiguous) hour as you see fit. If you want to go out and smoke for a half hour, so be it.

. When you take your 15 minute break you can "go outside" if you want, provided you make your supervisor/backup person where you are going.

. If you work in the booth you don't always have the luxury of taking a whole hour off for lunch. You have to take your breaks when you can get them. (Between sets.) Furthermore, you may be called back to solve a problem even though you are on break. You can't say, "No, I'm not going to fix the sound problem in theater #5 because I'm on lunch break." (!)
If (on prior agreement with your supervisor) you want to take a half hour break to eat something and use the other half of your break later on, you may "go outside" then.

You must have agreed upon this beforehand. Furthermore, there will be no such thing as taking 6 ten minute breaks throughout the day or junk like that.

I think this is MORE than fair. The people who work in the booth are supposed to be the more responsible people of the bunch. Conversely, if the supervisor thinks your work has sucked lately, he can take away "special break privileges." In that case... Too bad... So sad!

 |  IP: Logged

Dominique Replogle
Film Handler

Posts: 61
From: Highland Utah
Registered: Apr 2004


 - posted 05-12-2004 04:34 PM      Profile for Dominique Replogle   Author's Homepage   Email Dominique Replogle   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
The only problem with counting up all of the break minutes is if your employee is going to be honest about how many minutes have been used versus how many they still have credited to them for the day. In my experience many will abuse this and eat a ten minute lunch and take annother twenty breaks lasting five minutes each. Thus leaving others to take up the slack every twenty or thirty minutes. I have a lot more important matters to attend to then to keep track of all of this crap. I am just glad it is not an issue since our entire booth is staffed with non smokers by coincedence. It is just unfortunate that a few selfish people give the other smokers a bad rap.

 |  IP: Logged

Rachel Craven
Madam Moderator

Posts: 2190
From: Pensacola, FL
Registered: Dec 2000


 - posted 05-12-2004 05:00 PM      Profile for Rachel Craven   Email Rachel Craven   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
When I was GM of my 3 screen we only had 4 employees on at most at one time. If the smoker got a 5 minute "freebie" then so did the non-smokers. With bigger theaters that's not quite possible though... [Razz]

 |  IP: Logged

Steve Kraus
Film God

Posts: 4094
From: Chicago, IL, USA
Registered: May 2000


 - posted 05-12-2004 05:59 PM      Profile for Steve Kraus     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Since smoking is not a protected right and has many negatives I see no reason why staff should be permitted to smoke anywhere on the property while on the clock. Off the clock they can smoke with the same limitations as the customers which means in the parking lot.

 |  IP: Logged

Paul G. Thompson
The Weenie Man

Posts: 4718
From: Mount Vernon WA USA
Registered: Nov 2000


 - posted 05-13-2004 01:31 AM      Profile for Paul G. Thompson   Email Paul G. Thompson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Steve, even though I am a smoker, I am 100% in agreement with you. In fact, I kind of wish my boss would make that a company policy...whether I liked it or not. [thumbsup]

BTW, did anyone ever tell you that you look like Josh Turner, the one who wrote and sang "The Long Black Train?"

Here is a picture of Josh from his wibsite:  -

 |  IP: Logged

Dominique Replogle
Film Handler

Posts: 61
From: Highland Utah
Registered: Apr 2004


 - posted 05-13-2004 06:36 PM      Profile for Dominique Replogle   Author's Homepage   Email Dominique Replogle   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Paul, that is a good one. Stick it on the seperated at birth thread

 |  IP: Logged

Gordon McLeod
Film God

Posts: 9532
From: Toronto Ontario Canada
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 05-13-2004 06:43 PM      Profile for Gordon McLeod   Email Gordon McLeod   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
recently I had a disagreement with a few fellow smokers who felt that they had a right to a smoke break of the length required to smoke there cig. Well as a pipe smoker I said then I should be entitled to the time it requires to smoke my pipe (and it is a big one about 1 hours worth)
they still tend to disagree am I being discriminated against [Smile]

 |  IP: Logged

Leo Enticknap
Film God

Posts: 7474
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000


 - posted 05-17-2004 01:38 AM      Profile for Leo Enticknap   Author's Homepage   Email Leo Enticknap   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
New study reveals dangers of 'passive smoking' by leisure industry employees.

quote:
Second-hand tobacco smoke at work kills hundreds of Britons each year - including almost one hospitality industry worker a week, a study says.

Thousands more are dying from passive smoking at home, according to researchers at Imperial College London. The figures were released ahead of a conference on smoking in London. Doctors said they highlight the need for a workplace smoking ban, but pro-smoking group Forest called for hard evidence passive smoking was a killer.

Professor Konrad Jamrozik looked at the number of people who died from lung cancer, heart disease and stroke in England and Wales in 2002. He then calculated how many of these would have died as a result of being exposed to second-hand tobacco smoke using a special mathematical formula.

This formula was based on information from other studies on the risks of dying from lung cancer, heart disease and cancer as a result of passive smoking.

Where is the hard evidence that passive smoking is killing people?

About 30% of adults under the age of 65 smoke. An estimated 42% of people under the age of 65 are exposed to tobacco smoke at home and 11% at work. According to Professor Jamrozik's calculations, approximately 700 people die from lung cancer, heart disease or stroke because of passive smoking at work. Another 3,600 people die as a result of second-hand smoke at home.

He also estimated that passive smoking kills one person working in the hospitality industry every week. Professor Jamrozik said the figures were probably the most accurate estimates available at the moment. "In the absence of a direct observational study, I feel this research is the best evidence we have in this country to show the effects of passive smoking in the workplace," he told the BBC.

Professor Carol Black, president of the Royal College of Physicians, urged the government to ban smoking in workplaces. "Environmental tobacco smoke in pubs, bars, restaurants and other public places is seriously damaging to the health of employees as well as the general public. "Making these places smoke-free not only protects vulnerable staff and the public, it will also help over 300,00 people in Britain to stop smoking completely."

However, Forest rejected that idea. "Once again we are presented with estimates, calculations and 'likely risk'," said Simon Clark, its director. "Where is the hard evidence that passive smoking is killing people? If one person dies every week from passive smoking at work, as the anti-smokers claim, it's time to name names. "Let's have proof, not statistics based on very dubious science."

He added: "A total ban on smoking indoors should be a last resort, not a first option. "What's wrong with a choice of designated smoking areas or better ventilation that allow people to smoke without bothering non-smokers?"

The UK government has so far resisted calls to ban smoking in the workplace. This is despite calls to do so from the chief medical officers of England and Scotland. Ministers have said they prefer a voluntary approach rather than following Ireland and introducing a ban.

I'm not sure if I'd support a complete ban, but tobacco smoke is certainly unpleasant and almost certainly very dangerous for any third party who breathes it in. In Britain - and I presume the same holds true in America - we generally go by the principle that anyone can do anything they like, provided it doesn't reduce other people's quality of life or endanger their safety. Smoking does both of those things. Even if you buy Forest's exploitation of the very small chance that the scientists have got it all wrong, there is still the statistically proven increased risk of fires on premises where smoking is allowed, for example.

There has to be something wrong with the current situation. 30% of the population smoke, but yet in my home city there is only one bar out of 370 licensed premises which even has a decent-sized no smoking area, let alone a total ban. While I don't think I'd go as far as Ireland, I would like to see a change in the situation whereby a third of the population can effectively force the rest us to drink in a gas chamber. One solution would be for licensees to have to apply for permission to have a smoking area, which is only granted if they can show that it is effectively segregated from the rest of the place.

As for employees, there must surely be a simple solution to this. Simply tell them at the outset that either (i) smoking is allowed in this workplace and that if they don't like it, they can get a job somewhere else, or (ii) that smoking is not allowed on or anywhere near the premises, and if they can't survive an eight-hour shift without a fag, they too can seek alternative employment.

 |  IP: Logged

Joe Redifer
You need a beating today

Posts: 12859
From: Denver, Colorado
Registered: May 99


 - posted 05-22-2004 07:28 PM      Profile for Joe Redifer   Author's Homepage   Email Joe Redifer   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
People who smoke kick ass. Why did they start? Lack of sufficient willpower? Seriously. Also, is it worth it? C'mon... is it really worth it?

People can do what they want on their break, but going out for a few minutes here and there is retarded, just like their habit. I agree with exactly what Brad wrote. At my video editing job, the smokers would constantly go outside for 5 or ten minutes while the rest of us non-smokers continued to work. So when they did this, I just stopeed working and was completely unproductive until everyone else sat their fat ass down (smokers are always out of shape) and got back to work. That cost the company quite a bit of cash, I reckon. Oh well, I'm not the retarded one! [Smile]

 |  IP: Logged

Paul G. Thompson
The Weenie Man

Posts: 4718
From: Mount Vernon WA USA
Registered: Nov 2000


 - posted 05-22-2004 09:23 PM      Profile for Paul G. Thompson   Email Paul G. Thompson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I'm not looking for sympathy here whatsoever.

However, nicotine is the most and addictive substance known to man. Once you are hooked, you are hooked. It is surprising how many people who quit had a relapse.

Back in my day, cigarette smoking was a way of life in the military. That's when I started. I was able to quit for a stretch of 4 years once, and I relapsed.

Since the dangers are known today that were not known 50 years ago, anyone who starts smoking now is totally a stupid idiot!!!

That's all I can say at present.

[ 05-22-2004, 10:45 PM: Message edited by: Paul G. Thompson ]

 |  IP: Logged

Jeremy Fuentes
Mmmm, Dr. Pepper!

Posts: 1168
From: Corpus Christi, TX United States
Registered: Jan 2004


 - posted 05-24-2004 06:21 AM      Profile for Jeremy Fuentes   Email Jeremy Fuentes   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
We just changed our policy to only being able to smoke on scheduled breaks, and not throughout the day. [thumbsup]

 |  IP: Logged

R. Andrew Diercks
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 232
From: Marion, Iowa (In the middle of everywhere)
Registered: May 2003


 - posted 05-26-2004 10:17 AM      Profile for R. Andrew Diercks   Email R. Andrew Diercks   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Many of my employees aren't old enough anyway. I just took over a 9 screen in which the previous manager was let go. She allowed 16 yr olds to have smoke breaks and an asst. manager would even buy for them. Now I'm the Nazi that corrected that. One of the youngens questioned why I have this strict policy to which I replied, "It's not really a policy, it's a law!" I do agree that smokers are less productive and they stink.

 |  IP: Logged



All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3 
 
   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic    next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:



Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.3.1.2

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.

© 1999-2020 Film-Tech Cinema Systems, LLC. All rights reserved.