URGENT Advice req re smoking at work.

[Oakie]

probably laying charges against your boss sort of ruled you out of employee of the month... just a guess

Just like having a boss hit him with a rake probably means he won't be nominating them for this year's 'Best Workplace' awards.

Interesting. A fella left our employ recently 'just' for sending threatening texts to a workmate. No actual assault took place. Perspective.

[Owl]

Just like having a boss hit him with a rake probably means he won't be nominating them for this year's 'Best Workplace' awards.

Interesting. A fella left our employ recently 'just' for sending threatening texts to a workmate. No actual assault took place. Perspective.

We had an employee dismissed after he was assaulted by a co-worker. Boss has a habit of being a moron, only this time it cost him several grand. I don’t think I was very popular either when I laughed like fuck at hearing the outcome.

[reofix]

a couple of k is cheap to get rid of a retard in your operation... happily pay many times that in the right circumstances... bad employees are very expensive pieces of crap to have around

[3umph]

bad employees are very expensive pieces of crap to have around

thats for real

[mynameis]

while I agree that if this is legal and they can do it then I will suck it up and live with it, my original question was if it was legal cause it would piss me off to find out in a years time that I was within my rights to fight this clause.

Past 2 days I have not smoked during working hours. Find I chain smoke during lunch though.

what I find strange is everyone is concentrating on the smokng itself rather than the question at hand (which has been answered by a couple) that it is a priniciple of restrictive rights rather than the smoking.

Alright Pal, there's been a lot of rubbish on this thread. Leaving behind all the malarkey, contracts, employment/human rights, employment law, past issues ect ect..deal with what you have on hand at the moment.

Rest assured the advice given previously by myself is correct (given the info you have supplied). So without getting too complicated with all of the above here's how you need to view it:

Your employer has given a simple instruction that you are not to smoke during working hours however if you smoke during your breaks that's totally fine.

So your working hours is the time you are getting PAID to do your job and it's actually the employer's time as well, as they are paying you to be there to do something.

Therefore they can and have the right to dictate what you will be doing during these paid hours and what you WON'T be doing (instructions to carry out your duty reasonably) which in this case in your employer's opinion is without a fag in your mouth during working hours. Whether you're a Green Keeper or a CEO it doesn't matter, every employee at the end of the day is accountable.

Hope that helps, anything else fire away

[BMWST?]

I was off work for 9 days on medical leave and then

medical leave?Doctors certificate?What does it say about (cause) of injury.Is it equitable(or reasonable force) to strike someone with a rake,vs throw grass seed.That is NOT reasonable

[Kemet]

to make it clear, the course is not smoke free. Just the empolyees, and being the only smoker on staff means just me.

There is a HUGE backstory that goes with this that I wont go into but rest assured that this rule is just to pick on me as a backlash for past events.



This notice was given to me this morning.

Just like having a boss hit him with a rake probably means he won't be nominating them for this year's 'Best Workplace' awards.

Interesting. A fella left our employ recently 'just' for sending threatening texts to a workmate. No actual assault took place. Perspective.

Aggravated (??) assault. As long as the receiver felt that the threats would be carried out, that the guy would do what he said he would do in the texts, it counts.

hmmmm.

I am very good at my job.

I have been working with grass for a very long time.

Unfortunately I have pissed them off because I laid police charges against my manager and that didnt get well recieved (no shit sherlock)
They wont fire me. They would be right up a creek if they do because even in the findings of their internal investigation that found I was assaulted but not enough to warrent action against the accused they say that I am very god at my job. (it actually says we are both very good at our jobs)

No actual assault my arse!! Assault is assault. If a guy can get taken to court for flicking his childs' ear ... well nuff said!!

When they don't have grounds to fire you without it being unfair dismissal it always comes down to them saying "they are both good at their jobs" crap.

As Nasty said earlier... it's sounding more and more like Constructive Dismissal. Been there before myself but was too young and didn't have the balls to stand up for myself and left even though it meant going on the dole.


In my current job at Port Otago we have two unions available. I, personally am in the Maritime Union. In each of my last two jobs I was given an opportunity to join a union. At Cadbury's it is the Service and Food Workers Union (SFWU) and they are damn good. At BP we had EPMU available. I don't know if you qualify, but I think your best bet if you aren't in a union already (sorry haven't read all the posts on this thread to see if you are as the thread has gotten quite sizable...), would be to try the EPMU. Here is a link to their "Guide to Rights" page.

In the meantime, I hope for your sanity, as much as anything else, you a quietly looking for another job so that when you walk out of this one, you have another to walk into (which is likely, no disrespect to you, but I hope you wouldn't stay in a job causing you as much stress as this one is - not worth shortening your life [further???]).

As a side.. I don't smoke and do get a little bummed at times when the other guys at work, that do smoke, bugger off for one out the back when it aint break time. Other times I just go with them figuring as long as I'm upwind I may as well have a break with 'em. Fairs, fair. Same perks for everyone smoker or not. None of them have complained when I hang with them, whether it's because they don't mind or just don't wanna get in the shit with the boss, I don't know.... or care....

[Owl]

a couple of k is cheap to get rid of a retard in your operation... happily pay many times that in the right circumstances... bad employees are very expensive pieces of crap to have around

You know nothing other than the very basics I posted. So as you know fuck all about it, do as cowboyz suggested!!!

[MSTRS:Me]

As Nasty said earlier... it's sounding more and more like Constructive Dismissal.

Actually, she said (twice) Constructed Dismissal. Typo? Or a subtle, but important, difference?
I read her to mean that the grounds for dismissal were planned and manufactured, that CB' is being set-up to put himself in the gun.

[Beemer]

Most employers would not be happy with their workers popping out for a smoke every 30 minutes or so (as several women I worked with used to do) as it is during work time, not their breaks. I'm sorry, but if they don't allow you to down tools and make a coffee every time you feel like it, why should smoking be any different?

If they have changed your conditions of employment due to something in the past then get that addressed, but I do get tired of smokers expecting special treatment, which is what you appear to be asking for. Just because you work somewhere that allows smoking in public areas doesn't mean you should be allowed to smoke when you feel like it.

If you worked in an office or some other enclosed work space where smoking was not allowed, you'd have to get used to only smoking in your breaks. It looks to me like you're surrounded by people smoking in their leisure time and want to join them, which is not your employer's problem.

[3umph]

Most employers would not be happy with their workers popping out for a smoke every 30 minutes or so (as several women I worked with used to do) as it is during work time, not their breaks. I'm sorry, but if they don't allow you to down tools and make a coffee every time you feel like it, why should smoking be any different?

If they have changed your conditions of employment due to something in the past then get that addressed, but I do get tired of smokers expecting special treatment, which is what you appear to be asking for. Just because you work somewhere that allows smoking in public areas doesn't mean you should be allowed to smoke when you feel like it.

If you worked in an office or some other enclosed work space where smoking was not allowed, you'd have to get used to only smoking in your breaks. It looks to me like you're surrounded by people smoking in their leisure time and want to join them, which is not your employer's problem.

Well said

[cowboyz]

Most employers would not be happy with their workers popping out for a smoke every 30 minutes or so (as several women I worked with used to do) as it is during work time, not their breaks. I'm sorry, but if they don't allow you to down tools and make a coffee every time you feel like it, why should smoking be any different?
because if I go have a coffee (which I dont actually drink) I do have to down tools and spend 15-30 mins not working.
If I have a smoke it takes 15 seconds to pick one out of my pocket and light it and I carry on working. There is a difference in the ammoount of work that gets down.

As a side point. It has kinda worked out a little counter-productive for them because now (and moreso in 2 weeks) I will be going to sit on my arse and have a smoke at my smoke breaks. Before I would just work through and grab a coke and store it on the mower and carry on working while smoking and drinking my coke.

If they have changed your conditions of employment due to something in the past then get that addressed, but I do get tired of smokers expecting special treatment, which is what you appear to be asking for. Just because you work somewhere that allows smoking in public areas doesn't mean you should be allowed to smoke when you feel like it.
again. as above. When it has no actual effect on the work either way and moreso a negative effect by making me stop working to smoke it doesnt make good sense to ban smoking for the sake of banning smoking. But they have so I take my 10 mins in the morning and half an hour at lunch and smoke. In 2 weeks I will be taking another 10 mins in the afternoon. Thats the hardest part of my day at the moment is working all afternoon without a smoke.
If you worked in an office or some other enclosed work space where smoking was not allowed, you'd have to get used to only smoking in your breaks. It looks to me like you're surrounded by people smoking in their leisure time and want to join them, which is not your employer's problem.

errr, there is a reason why I decided to work in a career that is outdoors. For 20 years I have been able to have a smoke whenever I feel like it. At 1 minutes notice I have now been told that I cant smoke whenever I feel like it. I might point out that for the last 3 days I have abided by the rules. If I knew they could demand anything at will I wouldn't have got a job earning $13/hr! I might as well have gone and worked in a factory for alot more.

[BiK3RChiK]

I think your employer is being unreasonable, Cowboyz. That said, since you are in this little pickle already, for coping mechanisms, have you tried chewing gum and listening to your fav music on an mp3 player whilst working? or are these things 'prohibited' too?

All the best working it out, eh..

[cowboyz]

i actually wear radio earmuffs (which are my own). They wouldnt dare banning those. The others all wear them too and the shit would hit the fan in a big way if they did that.

[Jerms]

But when you smoke it makes other people more tolerable.

With all due respect...maybe when you don't smoke, it makes you more tolerable to other people...stir stir...