Smoking breaks
Tuesday, January 14, 2020 at 16:53 I said last week that January brings out the worst in anti-smoking crusaders.
Another story that's doing the rounds concerns a Swindon-based company whose managing director (a smoker, natch) has decided to give non-smokers an extra four days' holiday each year to make up for the 'fact' that smokers spend less time working because of all those fag breaks.
The first report appeared in the Swindon Advertiser last Thursday.
Over the weekend it went national (Sun, Mirror, Daily Mail), then international.
The BBC picked it up yesterday (Swindon firm gives non-smokers extra holiday).
Last night I was on BBC Points West and this morning I was on BBC Suffolk. I then had to catch a train to London to record an interview for 5 News at ITN.
En route I also spoke to Jeremy Vine on Radio 2.
Don Bryden, MD of KCJ Training and Employment Solutions, must be pinching himself with all the free publicity but it's a bit depressing that a guaranteed way to attract media attention is to discriminate against a group of employees, most of whom probably work just as hard (and some more efficiently) than many of their non-smoking colleagues.
The presenter on Points West argued that it isn’t discrimination because smokers are not being punished, they are being incentivised to quit. Non-smokers meanwhile are simply being compensated for the 'fact' that smokers work fewer hours (allegedly).
I take the view that everyone is legally entitled to one 15-minute break in the morning and another in the afternoon. What they do during those breaks is up to them.
If smokers take additional breaks (Bryden estimated that some of his employees are taking three ten-minute smoking breaks every day) that suggests weak management.
It’s a fallacy moreover to claim that smokers do less work than non-smokers. I’m sure there are a handful of smokers who abuse their employers' trust and nip out more often than they should but do non-smokers never take additional coffee breaks, make personal phone calls, spend time on social media etc etc during working hours?
Although this appears to be a one-off PR stunt, the direction of travel is clear. First we create a two-tier workplace (smokers and non-smokers), then employers may choose not employ smokers at all.
Welcome to 2020.
Update: I'm on BBC Radio Essex at 5.30 followed by BBC Radio Ulster (5.45). I shall also be speaking to James Whale on TalkRadio at 8.30.
Tomorrow I'm on Sky News.
Reader Comments (3)
20th century job adverts - "No Blacks, No Irish, No Homosexuals No Jews." 21st century - No Smokers.
Wow and that, folks, is social progression. Bullies still need to have someone to hate, grieving people need someone to blame, pretentious elites need someone to feel socially superior to, and moralists need someone to scorn.
The direction of travel never changes. The hypocrites just shoot different targets along the road depending on who can be dehumanised next with the help of useful idiots or exploitation of vulnerable people.
For what it's worth, I only ever take breaks that all employees are permitted by the employer and never more than I am entitled to. I am not alone in being a smoker who has worked more hours than paid to get jobs done, and put in an awful lot of unpaid and unrewarded goodwill in my working life out of respect for an employer - But why individualise anyone when bigots can brand a whole group of people as idle based on nothing more than than prejudice and bias.
The media, knowingly or not, is helping to wage a powerful public hate campaign against a targeted identified minority group. It would be illegal against any other identifiable minority group and certainly publically paid for broadcasters would lose funding as a result of such incitement to hatred.
"Bullies still need to have someone to hate, grieving people need someone to blame, pretentious elites need someone to feel socially superior to, and moralists need someone to scorn."
F-A-B quote, Pat! Sums up the current social attitudes perfectly.
Hey, Simon - you should make a note of it and reel it off at appropriate times in future interviews, maybe with a little hint that every intolerant non-smoker listening/watching should perhaps ask themselves which category they fall into! Assuming that Pat doesn't mind, of course!
I sometimes think my angry posts would be best avoided by Simon who has to try not to alienate everyone but if he, or anyone else, finds what I have said useful in helping to wake people up to the hate campaign beng waged against with public money, then feel free.
Thanks for the support Misty. It is how I genuinely feel.