November 18 2009: Productivity of Smokers
In the office building next to the one in which I work, there are a small handful of dedicated pack-a-day smokers. In the morning when I walk into work, they’re standing out there. When I go out for meetings, they’re standing out there. When I go out for lunch, they’re standing out there. When I head out to the bank in the afternoons, they’re standing out there. When I leave work, they’re standing out there. There was one day when I was in and out of the office all day, from 8am to 6pm in meetings. For the six or seven times I walked past their building, they were out there smoking.
Which got me thinking: if you were their non-smoking colleague or employer, how pissed off would you be? Assuming they take cigarette breaks once an hour, or once every hour and a half, and that every cigarette takes anywhere between five and ten minutes to smoke (allowing for chit chat with other smokers, etc.), in a normal working day, they’d be spending an hour smoking, in addition to their lunch break. In a normal working year, you’re losing about 250 hours of productivity per worker – work that is probably being taken up by non-smoking employees.
Those figures are enough to encourage me to discriminate against heavy smokers if I was an employer. Given two candidates with identical qualifications – one a smoker, one not, I’d definitely hire the non-smoker. Think about it. Imagine them missing an important phone call because they’re out smoking. Imagine them rushing an important project because they’ve wasted important working hours smoking. Imagine them excusing themselves from a lengthy meeting in order to have a smoke. Imagine them meeting important stakeholders reeking of cigarette smoke. Imagine them costing your companies thousands in health insurance and sick leave because of lung-related diseases.
I understand that smoking is an addiction, and that nicotine is a drug like any other. But I simply have no sympathy for people who are weak-willed enough to let themselves get so dependent on something so destroying. Perhaps the solution is to hit them in the wallet – docking pay for all the hours wasted smoking. If smokers find their paychecks are lighter by $100 per week, they might find more motivation to reduce their habit to one every two hours, or one every three hours, instead of one every hour.
21 Responses to “Productivity of Smokers”
Leave a Reply
I reserve the right to edit or delete your comment as I see fit, though I only delete comments from anonymous commenters, or people with multiple aliases. Using a genuine name/email combination will ensure that your comment is approved.
This is why, if I were ever an employer, there’d be a clause in every contract that stipulates that smokers are not allowed to take extra breaks to smoke. They can only smoke in the breaks that they’re actually entitled to.
I don’t understand why there are some employers that allow their smoking employees extra break time when they’d probably reprimand a non-smoking employee for taking a 10 minute break to eat a chocolate bar or something.
Darnielle on November 18 2009 #
Not a smoker myself, but I guess the issue is more about work ethic, rather than the ‘physical presence’ at a job. (unless you’re the receptionist or something, where it’s a requirement that you sit at your work desk!)
If people have a good work ethic, then it’s irrelevant whether they’re a smoker or not. A non-smoker might be daydreaming at his/her desk, chit-chatting to co-workers, on the phone to their friends or going on facebook even if they might appear to be sitting at their desk, working.
It’s just easier to pick on the smokers I guess, but all those other issues are just as important (and probably harder to detect) when making a hiring decision!
kat on November 18 2009 #
I’m with you on this one.
I’d be pretty damn pissed that someone could waste 15 minutes so many times a day, addiction or not.
If I was a NON-SMOKER then I should be allowed to wander around and do what I want for as many times as they do.
Period. The rules should be the same for everyone, addiction or not.
Style on a String ..because style has nothing to do with money.
Serena : Style on a String on November 18 2009 #
I would never expect that smokers will get extra breaks compared to normal employees, all the places I’ve worked, smokers get the same breaks as everyone else, they just use them wisely (chain smoking). *shrug* If people can’t make it through that long without having a cigarette, then they should chew gum or use a patch or something.
I know my mum basically gets to work and has a cigarette before she goes in, then has a cigarette (or two, I guess, depending how long the break is :P) every tea break and lunch (which everyone is entitled to) and a cigarette right after. She can probably smoke like ten or more cigarettes during those breaks, but not taking any extra time to have them. She works for the ministry of defense as a dental nurse.
Macca on November 19 2009 #
It’s actually illegal to discriminate against somebody for being a smoker. You can fire them, but you can’t NOT hire them, because you don’t know that they won’t perform. If the smoker took you to court, you’d probably end up losing.
At least, that’s the way the laws work here in the US.
Stephanie on November 19 2009 #
Agreed! One more reason why smoking is bad for EVERYONE!
me in millions on November 19 2009 #
I agree with you completely.
Smoking makes me really angry mainly for the detrimental factors that it causes people around smokers. But I think the idea of smokers getting extra breaks is absolutely ludicrous. Sure, they’re addicted and they need it. But as I see it, it was their choice to start smoking in the first place, and in today’s day and age, you know full well the consequences if you’re going to pick it up. I think it’s disgusting, unnecessary, and should be illegal.
I can somewhat excuse older people who started smoking when the detrimental effects were not as clear, but still. Meh.
/rant
Ashley on November 19 2009 #
I’m kind of with kat here. Yes, I pretty much hate smokers, but I can have fairly bad work habits and waste lots of time on the internet – and it probably looks like I’m working. (Ha. Work. I just want to hide in a pile of sand.)
I read recently that you should take a short break after 90 to 120 minutes of intense focus to get up, walk around, and/or talk to someone, to refresh yourself. Maybe these people are sort of doing the same?
On the other hand, running in and out of meetings is about the same as taking a break between them, so you wouldn’t need a break as much.
Hey, I have a question for you personally Amanda. Can I have some of your focus and concentration and work ethic? Pretty please with a cherry on top? :D
Stephanie on November 19 2009 #
I feel like, as a non-smoker, I waste just as much time dragging my feet. So I’m hardly one to judge.
Arielle on November 19 2009 #
I’m a smoker. At my work, we all get set break times (in a 10 hour shift I get 1 hour of breaks – a 30 mins and 2x 15 mins breaks) so smokers can’t take “extra”. We get the same breaks as everyone else.
Kelly on November 19 2009 #
Where I work, you have set break times. You don’t even get to choose when to take your break. You’re allowed to smoke, but in a 4-6 hour shift you only have 15 minutes in which to do it, and in an 8 hour shift you have 45 minutes.
Personally, I’d rather have lunch during my break time… :P
Clem on November 19 2009 #
100% Agree. I think such ends up being a discrimination against the non smoker who wouldn’t be allowed to take such superfluous breaks.
Mar on November 19 2009 #
In our company we have a lot of smokers, who… frequently enough go out. My current team mates… I think they do it every 3-4 hours, but I knew some who did it every hour or so, but they also stayed later to make up for that time.
Vera on November 19 2009 #
But you’re assuming that all smokers are the same and that they all smoke the same number of cigarettes in the same amount of time. My boyfriend has a cigarette habit and he does take smoke breaks at work, but everyone else gets two 10 minute breaks and one 30 minute lunch break. He takes 6-7 five minute breaks per day for eating a quick snack/cigarette and does not take a lunch break. Not all smokers are the same.
It’s not legal in Canada either to discriminate against someone who smokes, but employers can have set break times. However, where I was working over the summer, there was a person who didn’t smoke who would take hour-long lunch breaks and extra breaks throughout the day because it wasn’t regulated. So really, it depends on how you look at it, in terms of if smoking or not smoking is really a real reason not to work with someone or not to hire someone.
Michelle on November 19 2009 #
I’m a smoker and have NEVER EVER taken a ‘quick smoke break’ aside from the regular, unpaid breaks EVERY employee is given.
That would be ridiculous and I’d be pissed as hell if someone else was doing that.
Rina on November 19 2009 #
I’m not gong to lie–the instant I find out someone is a smoker, I’m immediately disappointed. I think that’s my one big prejudice.
However, at my former workplaces, everyone gets the same amount of breaks. By Washington state law, if you work a four hour shift, you’re entitled to a 15 minute paid break, all at once and not split up. If you work even a second over five hours, you’re required to take a 15 paid minute break and a 30 minute UNpaid meal break (again, can’t be broken up). At seven hours, you get two 15 minute paid breaks and the 30 minute unpaid meal break.
At some offices, it might work out a bit differently because there are slightly different rules if you’re paid for your lunch breaks and, if you’re not using a time clock, it’s more difficult to track, so I can see that system being abused.
Donna on November 19 2009 #
That’s why at the office I work at one is not allowed to go for a smoke unless it’s in your lunch or coffee break. Just like any other employees. And I have to say I’m really happy about that.
I’m not a smoker and I wouldn’t put up with people not doing their job because they feel they have to take a smoke instead. Just like I don’t put up with anyone not doing their job because of whatever reason. I’m not a boss but if it makes my workload heavier because of reasons like smoking, you bet I’m talking to someone (either the slacker or the boss if they don’t listen) because then I would either want something done about it or get more money for the extra work I have to take on.
Chans on November 20 2009 #
I’ve witnessed the same situation – I live near an office and there is a crowd of people standing in the corner of the parking lot – always. Though, I have no idea if they are the same people. Today, it’s raining heavily and it’s very windy – yup, two people standing there getting soaked.
As a few people mentioned, it’s fine as long as it doesn’t affect their work performance and they get everything done. But… it depends on the job type – if they’re supposed to sit on their asses and answer phones or anything that requires constant attention, they shouldn’t just wander off. Another thing is if they get paid b hour…
As for breaks, I’m also against any extra breaks – everyone should have the same ones. Some of them can go smoking, while some wander off to make an extra cup of coffee.
In my office there is a designated smoking area which is … the hallway. My boss goes out for a cigarette every half an hour or so, when the drivers come along they all go on a massive cigarette break. If, I wanted to, I also could do it, since I wouldn’t have a problem with answering phones.
As for co-workers, I have an interesting story – in early 2000s my mother’s workplace had a smoking room where half of the office met up and chatted. My mother was envious because of social reasons and the fact they got extra breaks. Some people though, came up with a brilliant idea – they started smoking/pretended to smoke, just to mingle with the crowd. As of now, the room is gone and the smoke outside, I think they still have an extra break.
Lea on November 20 2009 #
I don’t smoke, but I am not bothered by those who do. I do not believe it is common for smokers to take more breaks than they are allotted, and you really should recognize that everyone has different levels of productivity. I am paid for the hours I work, and I do not slack off, but I know for a fact that I am not working every minute of every hour. I still get my shit done.
It’s probably a good thing you *aren’t* an employer then, if that is your attitude. Such discrimination is most likely illegal in Australia, since it pretty much is in countries with very similar makeups. If you were to practice such discrimination, I doubt you would be in business for long.
I do not know how health insurance is run in countries with universal healthcare, but it is fairly common in the US to have a yearly limit on insurance. A smoker with the problems you have listed would very likely use up their insurance before the end of the year. No extra cost to the business, except for perhaps missed days.
You say you understand smoking is an addiction like any other, but I don’t really think you do. Most who take up smoking never imagine how dependent they’ll become on the things.
Basically, I do not think the office workers you see every day is a typical example, and to base the assumptions you make on the productivity of smokers solely on them is pretty ridiculous.
Jennifer on November 22 2009 #
Smoker here and I’d say that I see non-smokers spend way more time chatting in front of the coffee machine or at another’s cube than I spend smoking. I also manage to complete three times as much work as my non-smoking colleagues. If productivity is your issue, why don’t we rule out all chit-chatting at work, ban any and all non-work related websites and lunch breaks because, heck, you won’t starve to death if you don’t eat lunch.
Angela on November 23 2009 #
Are you seeing the same smokers outside every time? Maybe individuals already do go out every two-three hours, and you’re just seeing a lot of rotation of different people outside every hour.
Reply: Same three women every time actually.
Sarah on December 7 2009 #