Morning:
13°c
An awesome and ridiculous film that leaves you thrilled beyond the point of your natural endurance
London faces a wave of bus and Tube strikes that could cause chaos for millions of passengers as unions walkout over pay and conditions
More...
Council bans its workers' smoking
Last updated at 11:45am on 23.10.06
No go: smokers at Croydon council are angry at the ban on breaks to start in the new year
Workers have been banned from taking cigarette breaks in advance of next summer's all-out ban on smoking in public.
Staff at Croydon council have been warned it will no longer be acceptable for them to nip out for a cigarette during office hours. Instead, they have been offered nicotine patches to help them quit.
The news has been met with horror by employees.
One woman based at Taberner House, the council's headquarters, who asked not to be named, said: "It's a disgrace. We work as hard as non-smokers and need to be able to go outside and have a quick cigarette.
"Most only pop outside once or twice a day, and, if you compare those 10-15 minutes with the extra hours we work, it's not asking for much. It's a complete infringement of our human rights."
The council ban on cigarette breaks will come into force in January. The authority has also appealed to head teachers at all its schools to impose a no smoking policy on staff.
Experts believe most companies and public bodies will begin to reconsider their policy on smoking in the new year.
The Government will impose a national ban on smoking in public buildings - including offices, restaurants, cafés, and bars - in the summer, meaning an end to official smoking areas.
But Simon Clark, director of smokers' rights group Forest, accused the council of being petty: "Croydon are jumping on the anti-smoking bandwagon. It seems incredibly petty as well as being classic bad management. If some people think having a cigarette break makes them better at their job, that's their choice.
"If the break is not impacting on the ability of people to do their job, then the authority has no right to dictate this to their employees."
Cllr Steve O'Connell, deputy council leader and cabinet member for public protection and crime reduction, said: "I know the ban will cause some discomfort to smokers, but the point is to put everyone's health first.
"I have no doubt a year or two down the line it won't even be a topic of conversation and we will have cleared a major hurdle towards improving public health in general."
The move was supported by Croydon Unison. Assistant branch secretary, Mervyn D'Cruz, said: "Smoking has clearly proved harmful to public health and, as a union, we have to be in line with this. People can smoke on their lunch breaks.
"It's about compromise. Right now I'm more worried about job cuts and budget deficits."
Reader views (16)
If smoking and second-hand smoke is a killer, why don't the government ban cigarettes and tobacco altogether.
And don't tell me that governments are hooked on taxes.
Is health more important than money?
www.forces.org
- Thomas Laprade, Thunder Bay, Ont. Canada
Have smokers really got any idea how bad they smell when coming back from their break? I know it must be very hard to give up or go for a long time without a cigarette, but it does NOT entitle them to extra time away from the office.
My work partner is taking his tobacco from his pocket as I'm typing this. How long will he be away for? Usually 10 minutes. I'll still be here working. Any chance I can nip outside and play games on my mobile for 10 minutes? This would get me sacked!
- Anni, Greenock
May I suggest to Louisa of London who is so intolerant of "weak willed" smokers whom no one forces to smoke that no one forces her to eat processed and chemically treated food. Perhaps if she were less lazy she would buy raw ingredients and cook a meal instead of buying it off the shelf. People in glass houses...
- J. Stewart, Thornaby, England
Excessive and petty. We have just had reports in Scotland saying that our purchases of tobacco are 5 per cent higher than they were before the ban. This demonstrates that however smart it may be to give up smoking, banning is not the way to persuade people to do it.
I'm a non-smoker and don't find smoke either vile or frightening. There is absolutely no reason not to accommodate smokers properly at work. Alcohol does do enormous damage in terms of addiction, not only to alcoholics but to their families. Alcoholics may not drive cars as much as the general population but carnage on the road caused by drink is far more damaging in the immediate term than smoke is in the long term. Cigarette consumption is not responsible for broken families and homes in the same way that alcohol and gambling are.
Those of you who say that smokers don't work as hard as everybody else need a reality check. Cigarette smoking is entirely irrelevant to how hard people work.
- Belinda, Edinburgh, UK
Around 40 years ago I attended a colour TV training course at the Philips factory on the Purley Way, there was no air conditioning and it was unseasonably and incredibly hot in the factory. I didn't smoke then or now although many attendees did. Since then I have probably spent too much time in smokyy bars and offices. My experience is that passive smoking – even in an enclosed environment is nothing more than a myth. There is more pollution out on the street, that’s obvious, but in the ‘blame society’ in which we now live it is essential to pick on someone so let’s all get the smokers – that will make everything better! won’t it?
- Dave Rawle, Bude, UK
They're not gonna stop with smoking! Good luck, suckers!
- Ed Brown, USA
It might be a bad thing, Neil, but imagine if smoking stopped existing right now. Where would the government get all that tax from? Yep, you've got it nailed - YOU!
- Jay, London
In response to Paulina in Richmond . . .
"Fatties" and everyone else in the human race need to eat to live. Smokers DO NOT need to smoke and alcoholics DO NOT need to drink and drug addicts do not need to take drugs - these addictions are brought about by weak willed people who need to have some type of a crutch to get through life. Any illness and condition caused by either smoking, drinking or drug-taking is completely "Self-Inflicted" yet there is a huge support network out there for them. Even Anorexics get specialist treatment, counselling and sympathy for their "illness", which again is "Self-Inflicted". However, "Fatties" as you call them, are not always fat through self-infliction - a lot of obesity is caused by the disgusting processed and chemically treated food that we are forced to eat these days and a result of all the costly marketing hype that these huge conglomerates make a fortune from promoting yet fat people ar still treated like lepers and duiscriminated against at every opportunity. Smoking is a vile and disgusting habit and should be stamped out all together - the only reason it isn't is because of the excessive amount of tax the government receive from smokers.
So Paulina, get back in your pram and stop discrinminating against fat people - we don't all sit around scoffing cakes and pies for 24 hours a day - unlike smokers who don't seem to be able to function without an unsightly cancer stick stuck in their gobs at every opportunity!
- Louisa, London
Let the smoker continue smoking as long as the time they use is taken out of their lunch hour, 4 fags X 10 minutes = 40 minutes, so that person now has 20 minutes left in the day.
- Ben, London
When everyone is 'forced' to stop smoking (I dont' know how many millions are out there), where is the Government going to find the money to plug the gap in the revenue they get from cigarette sales? And when everyone is living well into their 90s, where is the money going to come from for their care? Stand by Britain's Tax Payers, the next 20 years are going to be a very bumpy ride.
- Dan, Manchester
I really get annoyed at people who take loads of smoking breaks at work. They must work a hell of a lot less than us non-smokers who sit there and work hard and then have to smell the smokers when they come back from their break stinking like an ashtray. Smoking - like drinking - shouldn't be allowed in office hours. And you know what? I don't care how stressed people get. They should learn to relax or invest in some patches!
- Michelle, West Dulwich
I am a smoker and I feel that this is totally unfair. Smoking rooms at work are for smokers, and while it is still legal for us smokers to have a quick fag at work I think we should be allowed to! I don't hold with companies getting rid of smoking rooms early. It's bag out of order and reeks of prejudice and sucking-up-to-the-government feeling. Employers: be nice to your employees!
- Mark, Barnet
As a smoker I already pay twice for any services from NHS I may or may not require - once in tax and again in NI contributions. I hate it that the NHS is now proposing not to treat me, and my workplace and government, which provides a canteen for the fatties, is saying I can't smoke in a designated smoking area! I would happily pay less for the fags if the government could come up with a better idea of extorting money from us.
- Paulina, Richmond
I don't know whether to be amused or annoyed by the government insisting that smokers are treated as lepers because of health issues that could be raised in the imaginery future.
Obviously smoking is harmful. It causes harm not only to the smoker but to those passive smokers in their vicinity. To be advised to give up smoking is a sensible suggestion and one that should be seen as such by those who have sound common sense.
- Darren G, Highgate
Smokers not only are the instruments of their own ill-health, but inflict on others the effects of their totally selfish habit (through passive-smoking related diseases). You cannot compare smokers with alcoholics - people who abuse alcohol do not damage other people's livers, only their own. Smoking breaks at work should be stubbed out, or at the very least people should go outside.
- Chrissy, Ealing
I think this is great the sooner we stamp out smoking once and for all the better.
- Neil, Harrow
