>>>>>http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/internet/09/05/pizza.firing.ap/index.html
>>>>>
>>>>>If this were a true standard, I would have been fired 1,000 times...
>>>>
>>>>Wild...
>>>>
>>>>You think that is low. For all of you who smoke, check this out.
>>>>
>>>>http://www.thenewstribune.com/news/government/story/5136742p-4674180c.html
>>>
>>>Personally, if it were up to me, I'd certainly give preference to non-smokers. On the other hand, there have been times when I thought about taking up smoking again just so that I could get that 15 minute break to go outside 7 or 8 times a day like the smokers do.
>>
>>Smoking is a luxury, not a privilege. If a company tells their employees that they are allowed two 15 minute breaks, and a half hour for lunch, then what the employee chooses to do with it should be their business. I do frown on smokers taking 5 minutes here, 7 minutes there, all day long. And then saying "It doesn't go against by break time!".
>>
>>I have worked near the top floor of some high buildings, and have seen people ride the elevator to the ground floor, just to have smoke. Come on. They spend more time riding then smoking. Would a employer allow me to take espresso breaks the same way? I don't think so. (But I never tried ;) )
>
>Smoking is not a luxury, it is an insanity. I was a smoker once and there is no question about it in my mind. I knew it then even while I puffed, and I know it now. It is a stupid pastime and I don't want to be anywhere around it.
>
>Having said that, though, I have to admit I am adamantly opposed to the Toronto, and soon to be Ontario laws against smoking in bars and restaurants. Being a so-called adult, I'm capable of deciding for myself whether I want to go into a particular bar or restaurant. And to those militant non-smokers who declare that they have a right to go into a certain bar and not have smokers around, I say, "What a crock. It's the bar owner's place, and if you don't like his chosen clientele, then stay out."

A couple years ago, the county that I live in declares one day that it was illegal to smoke in the bars. A $100 fine was imposed for the first affiance, and possible jail time afterwards. The people fought it, and it was appealed. I suggested to the local "waterhole" I often went to, that they should place a sign on the door stating "This is a smoking establishment". This gave the customer the chose before the entered the bar to whether they want to enter or not. The own took my suggestion, and place the sign up. A few weeks later, the city (I don't know who) came and told him he could not have the sign on his door. They also told him that it blatantly implied favoritism. But, a half block away is another bar, and on their door it states "This is a non-smoking establishment". And, the sign is still there. I view this as a double standards.