SMOKE - AND FIRED

TheNewYorkPost ^ | 2 October 2002 | DAVID SEIFMAN

[SheLion]

A top Housing Authority official has smoked himself out of an $80,000-a-year job.

After consulting with the mayor's office, Housing chairman Tino Hernandez yesterday ordered the immediate firing of Robert Swinton, the deputy director of the Office of Facility Planning, one of five employees spotted by a Post reporter last week in extended smoking sessions outside the agency's headquarters at 250 Broadway.

[SheLion]

Non-smoker bump for smokers' rights!

Thank you!! Your a sweetie!

It IS all about Freedom of Choice. We realize there are anti's and nonsmokers who do not want to be around smokers. That's fine. We understand that.

But for one group to want to yank rights of the other group because "they" hate it, is not reason enough to ban smoking.

There has been and always should be, room on this planet for all of us. That's what makes the world go around. Right?

We aren't terriorists. We aren't smoking mustard gas.

[NYCVirago]

I almost puked when reading the Post's self-serving editorial. They were the ones who published photos of city workers smoking, and did several stories on this "menace." Then they act all innocent because Bloomberg fired the very people caught smoking? Gimme a break! Bloomberg is a scumbag, but the Post is also responsible for this mess.

[SheLion]

Anyway - 37 years of smoking and I have a 98% lung usage capacity. After the test results my VA Dr. finally stopped raggin on me to quit! :-) Until the test she intimated to me that all my med probs were because I smoked. Now she's treating each problem for the problem that it is and life is good!.

Good for you! Smoking does NOT cause all the ills on earth. I know the anti's want to believe that, but that won't make it true.

I've been smoking just about as long as you have. And every year, when I go for my physical, all is well, thank God. And my lungs are clear. Go figure, eh?

The anti's want to make the general public believe that we are a burden on society.......wrong! We have our own health insurance. The anti's pump lies into the general public that smoking is a sure killer. Wrong again. Life is a sure killer! No one gets out of here alive.

[SheLion]

Like what else? The death penalty perhaps? Pretty vicious crime these people perpetrated.

The anti's would love to see ALL smokers shot or imprisoned.. We live in a sick world.

[FreedomPoster]

LOL! You make nasty, near-push-the-abuse-button-level personal attacks on my intelligence, don't discuss the issue, and I've shown my backside!? ROFLOL!

Glad to be on your list.

[SheLion]

Should a smoker-teacher be able to skim 69 minutes off of his morning classes just because he smokes ?

Permit me: teachers are too busy in class to be able to take smoke breaks. Common sense dictates this.

[SheLion]

I almost puked when reading the Post's self-serving editorial. They were the ones who published photos of city workers smoking, and did several stories on this "menace." Then they act all innocent because Bloomberg fired the very people caught smoking? Gimme a break! Bloomberg is a scumbag, but the Post is also responsible for this mess.

All the ills in NYC, and then we have these little Ashley Banfield wannabe's and the best they can report on are the working smoker's in the City. Pretty cheesy if you ask me.

[FreedomPoster]

>>We have our own health insurance.

Your own, negotiated with an insurance company that knew you were a smoker? Or as part of a business group policy?

I assure you our business got better rates because we discouraged smoking and tried to hire only non-smokers. The actuarial reality is that in group health policy situations, non-smokers are subsidizing the smokers on rates.

[SheLion]

LOL! You make nasty, near-push-the-abuse-button-level personal attacks on my intelligence, don't discuss the issue, and I've shown my backside!? ROFLOL!

That's ok. We are used to anti-smoking bashers coming into our threads. The anti's MAKE us nasty. You see how I talk to the others who are reasonable.

You come in here and tell us we are all UNEDUCATED BOOBS, and we are to sit quietly and agree? I'm sorry, but I won't put up with it. You have no idea what walks of life everyone in here come from. Yet, you lump all us in with some trash.

Am I wrong? Look back at your first post in here. You jumped on us like a dog going after raw meat. Admit it.

[SheLion]

I assure you our business got better rates because we discouraged smoking and tried to hire only non-smokers. The actuarial reality is that in group health policy situations, non-smokers are subsidizing the smokers on rates.

We are set for life with health insurance. So don't worry about paying anything for us! We have always paid our own way.

[JoeSixPack1]

wow,, condolences to your family.

My oldest friend in the world just came up with a grapefruit sized tumor in his left lung, which they went after with platinum chemo and got it all.

Tests revealed asbestos inhalation from a job he had in the the 70's did it. His kid's a lawyer. Bada boom!:-)

[oldtimer]

I just love these smoking nazis.

The only open season anymore since political correctness is smokers. Everything else is passe.

[BureaucratusMaximus]

And there's substantially more medical information about the damage done by smoking, than was known when any of those notables were alive.

With that comment sir, I can only assume that you feel the need to ban alcohol, fatty meats, and fast food as well...while we're at it why don't we ahead and ban gambling too.

[FreedomPoster]

I stand by my *in general* statement. Do you see a rise in smoking among educated Americans? Is it something you'd encourage your kids to do? Why would a business want to encourage/allow on-premises an activity that tends to reduce productivity, increase insurance rates, and drive away good employees?

I expect to hear crickets chirping . . . . . . .

[FreedomPoster]

In my business? There's very little drinking going on, and I wouldn't employ someone with a drinking problem. As far as fatty foods, while I enjoy a good burger every now and then, I probably wouldn't hire someone who is grossly overweight. Credit checks on new hires are a standard business practice, and would tend to reveal someone with a gambling problem.

But do I want to ban any of these activities using the force of government? No.

[Just another Joe]

Don't expect to hear them too loudly.

Do you see a rise in smoking among educated Americans?

Smoking is not on the rise, period. Whether among educated or uneducated. So, no, I don't expect to see a rise in smoking at all.

Is it something you'd encourage your kids to do?

I wouldn't encourage them but if my 18 year old came home and told me that she smoked I also wouldn't give her he!! about it. She's an adult , intelligent, and can make her own choices.

Why would a business want to encourage/allow on-premises an activity that tends to reduce productivity, increase insurance rates, and drive away good employees?

Why would this particular activity reduce productivity? Most jobs I have worked allow certain time for breaks. What I do that's legal during that time is my business. There is no lost productivity from a smoker that abides by the rules.
It may increase insurance rates but guess who pays that increase. One hint, it isn't the companies.
Why should it drive away good employees? There are good employees that smoke and good emplolyees that don't smoke and I have NEVER seen a good employee driven away JUST because one of the other employees smoked on their break.

[JoeSixPack1]

Your argument is circular. The anit's have created an unfriendly work atmosphere so to excel in group income earning you must submit to social engineered restrictions.

Smokers now subsidize more of your insurance costs then ever recorded before due to new taxation levels so THANK ME for any insurance costs you may save in the future!

[SheLion]

I stand by my *in general* statement. Do you see a rise in smoking among educated Americans? Is it something you'd encourage your kids to do? Why would a business want to encourage/allow on-premises an activity that tends to reduce productivity, increase insurance rates, and drive away good employees?

It's a pity your so narrow minded. My daughter, who is a grown woman, smokes.

Reduce productivity? Drive away good employees? What time zone are you in?

There are plenty of smokers in here that could run CIRCLES around you! Drive away "good" employees? Such as yourself? I remember working with a "few" good employees such as yourself, and no one at work could stand them.

Here's a link for you to educate yourself:

The BIG LIE That Smoking is an Economic Burden To Society

[SheLion]

The only open season anymore since political correctness is smokers. Everything else is passe.

Isn't it the truth?! Terriorists everywhere among us, yet all the anti's want to get rid of are smokers.

[Rightwing Conspiratr1]

Looks like the white guy was punished more severely than the women and peeples of colour.