Slickdeals is community-supported.  We may get paid by brands for deals, including promoted items.
Forum Thread

Smoking Ban and Termination

214 84 September 17, 2012 at 05:19 PM in Chat
In Illinois we have had a smoking ban for over 4 years which is long enough for everyone to have heard of in our state. I servie copy machines and do network maintenance and am being forced to go into an accounting firm in Central IL that feels that the smoking ban does not apply to them. The building smells, there is heavy smoke in the air, and the owner is kind of like a dragon. She doesn't even have a cigarette in her hand but she still will have smoke pouring out of her mouth after speaking 2 complete sentences.

Can I be fired for reporting them to the authorities and for letting them know that the reason I am unable to give them good service is due to the fact that I feel ill and get a migraine while in the office and cannot perform under the current circumstances?

109 Comments

Your comment cannot be blank.

Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.

Joined Dec 2007
Brown Recluse Aficionado
> bubble2 7,411 Posts
1,848 Reputation
chevvy
09-18-2012 at 12:51 PM.
09-18-2012 at 12:51 PM.
Quote from jj.12321 :
Yep, I agree.
It seems that many bars were thriving when smoking was allowed.
If there was such a demand for non-smoking bars, how come few (if any) were ever started.
Seems like it would've been very profitable to have the only non-smoking bar in town if that's what people really wanted.
Oh yea, it was people that DIDN'T GO TO BARS that decided smoking should not be allowed in them. laugh out loud
So they pass this ban.. In our city, businesses suffered because all the smokers started patronizing bars outside the city.. So the fix was to ban smoking in the whole state.. laugh out loud Brilliant!

Why can't each individual bar decide to be smoking or non-smoking (same with resturants)?
Again.....people want security over freedom. Enter TSA which started in airports and is now in bus stations, train stations, setting up random road blocks, etc..
Reply
Joined Oct 2007
Get over it
> bubble2 5,807 Posts
2,347 Reputation
AngryPirate
09-18-2012 at 01:16 PM.
09-18-2012 at 01:16 PM.
Quote from chewspam :
But to put a finer point on it, a person who uses a firearm is responsible for the bullet no matter where it lands and can be held liable for anything or anyone it hits.
So, what you're saying is that the action (firing a weapon) in itself is okay. However, where the bullet lands is the owner's responsibility. Am I on target (pun uintended) so far? Now if that weapon fired causes damage to another person's property, or worse yet, their health, then the gun owner is responsible for their actions, right? Why? ...because when a lawful act infringes on the health or freedoms of another person, the question has to be raised whether the specific circumstances of the act are still lawful. (ie...it's legal to drive a car...it becomes illegal when you drive you car over 20 shriners at the Macy's Day parade)

Another parallel in your argument that I'm not sure you realize you're making for me is that you stated something about it being legal to discharge your weapon as long as it's more than 100 feet away from any dwelling. WHY do you think they added that last part in there, rather than just say everyone can fire their gun willy nilly wherever and whenever they feel like it? Because it becomes a safety issue that infringes on the rights of others...which is coincidentally the exact same thing I'm saying about smoking. Sure business owner's should have the right to do it, but not in enclosed spaces where it affects others. (edit...there are always exceptions to the rule though, like hookah lounges, cigar shops, possibly even bars, etc. that I would be perfectly fine with those type businesses asking for exemption status if approved by vote/legislation/or whatever other means would be needed)


On a lighter note though, I do find it amusing that the smoker is defending the non-smoker's rights, and vice versa....laugh out loud
Reply
Last edited by AngryPirate September 18, 2012 at 01:24 PM.
Joined Mar 2009
Schrödinger's Frog
> bubble2 19,435 Posts
2,134 Reputation
Frogstar
09-18-2012 at 01:18 PM.
09-18-2012 at 01:18 PM.
Quote from ALVSGIRLY :
nod
It gives me a headache and makes my sinuses go bonkers. I'm glad they are cracking down on it in public places.
Perfume does the same thing to a lot of people. Guess they ought to start cracking down on perfume in public places too.
Reply
Joined May 2008
L6: Expert
> bubble2 1,445 Posts
51 Reputation
jj.12321
09-18-2012 at 01:23 PM.
09-18-2012 at 01:23 PM.
Quote from chewspam :
Again.....people want security over freedom. Enter TSA which started in airports and is now in bus stations, train stations, setting up random road blocks, etc..
Not to mention, the TSA is only there to harass normal passengers. They haven't made the airlines any safer.

They have had people routinely sneak things in past the TSA (in organized tests).

Yet, all that justifies removing our shoes, not being able to pack liquids, nail clippers being "weapons", etc, etc..
Reply
Joined May 2005
Proud Barner
> bubble2 36,606 Posts
1,385 Reputation
TigerStar
09-18-2012 at 01:28 PM.
09-18-2012 at 01:28 PM.
Quote from chewspam :
To the restaurant that prohibits smoking by choice. Smack

It's really disgusting the rights we have told people they have which infringe on the rights of others. Just today I heard a story of a school that has now prohibited Father/Daughter dances because a single mom filed a lawsuit via the ACLU claiming gender discrimination. So now all of those daughters looking forward to a night with their fathers will suffer.
You leave ryu-bum's daughter out of this.
Reply
Joined Jan 2008
HER SPOILED HIGHNESS
> bubble2 9,504 Posts
11,379 Reputation
ALVSGIRLY
09-18-2012 at 02:30 PM.
09-18-2012 at 02:30 PM.
Quote from Frogstar :
Perfume does the same thing to a lot of people. Guess they ought to start cracking down on perfume in public places too.
Perfume bothers me too. It's a lot easier to get away from though plus not as dangerous.
Reply
Joined Oct 2007
Get over it
> bubble2 5,807 Posts
2,347 Reputation
AngryPirate
09-18-2012 at 02:36 PM.
09-18-2012 at 02:36 PM.
Quote from Frogstar :
Perfume does the same thing to a lot of people. Guess they ought to start cracking down on perfume in public places too.
Women's shirts really give me a headache....Smilie
Reply

Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.

Joined Dec 2007
Brown Recluse Aficionado
> bubble2 7,411 Posts
1,848 Reputation
chevvy
09-18-2012 at 04:22 PM.
09-18-2012 at 04:22 PM.
Quote from AngryPirate :
So, what you're saying is that the action (firing a weapon) in itself is okay. However, where the bullet lands is the owner's responsibility. Am I on target (pun uintended) so far? Now if that weapon fired causes damage to another person's property, or worse yet, their health, then the gun owner is responsible for their actions, right? Why? ...because when a lawful act infringes on the health or freedoms of another person, the question has to be raised whether the specific circumstances of the act are still lawful. (ie...it's legal to drive a car...it becomes illegal when you drive you car over 20 shriners at the Macy's Day parade)

Another parallel in your argument that I'm not sure you realize you're making for me is that you stated something about it being legal to discharge your weapon as long as it's more than 100 feet away from any dwelling. WHY do you think they added that last part in there, rather than just say everyone can fire their gun willy nilly wherever and whenever they feel like it? Because it becomes a safety issue that infringes on the rights of others...which is coincidentally the exact same thing I'm saying about smoking. Sure business owner's should have the right to do it, but not in enclosed spaces where it affects others. (edit...there are always exceptions to the rule though, like hookah lounges, cigar shops, possibly even bars, etc. that I would be perfectly fine with those type businesses asking for exemption status if approved by vote/legislation/or whatever other means would be needed)


On a lighter note though, I do find it amusing that the smoker is defending the non-smoker's rights, and vice versa....laugh out loud
Facepalm That doesn't work. That's like saying I can smoke on someone else's property as long as I don't blow it on another person's property. And, yes, my point still stands. Come on to my property and fire all you want on my property. Now we are on firearm rights, property rights, and healthy rights (<- not even a real right). Nono

And I'm an on/off smoker. I still think it's disgusting, but sometimes, there's nothing more relaxing.....especially after a 10 mile run. laugh out loud
Reply
Last edited by chevvy September 18, 2012 at 04:28 PM.
Joined Oct 2007
Get over it
> bubble2 5,807 Posts
2,347 Reputation
AngryPirate
09-18-2012 at 04:31 PM.
09-18-2012 at 04:31 PM.
Quote from chewspam :
Facepalm That doesn't work. That's like saying I can smoke on someone else's property as long as I don't blow it on another person's property. And, yes, my point still stands. Come on to my property and fire all you want on my property. Now we are on firearm rights, property rights, and healthy rights (<- not even a real right). Nono

And I'm an on/off smoker. I still think it's disgusting, but sometimes, there's nothing more relaxing.....especially after a 10 mile run. laugh out loud
Facepalm

how about someone just fires there gun at the business owners smoking indoors? problem solved Whee
Reply
Joined Dec 2007
Brown Recluse Aficionado
> bubble2 7,411 Posts
1,848 Reputation
chevvy
09-18-2012 at 04:35 PM.
09-18-2012 at 04:35 PM.
Quote from AngryPirate :
Facepalm

how about someone just fires there gun at the business owners smoking indoors? problem solved Whee
Reply
Joined Oct 2007
Get over it
> bubble2 5,807 Posts
2,347 Reputation
AngryPirate
09-18-2012 at 04:37 PM.
09-18-2012 at 04:37 PM.
Quote from chewspam :
laugh out loud



Bleh
Reply
Joined Dec 2007
Brown Recluse Aficionado
> bubble2 7,411 Posts
1,848 Reputation
chevvy
09-18-2012 at 04:41 PM.
09-18-2012 at 04:41 PM.
Quote from AngryPirate :
laugh out loud



Bleh
Lounge debates FTW!!! Whee

GroupwaveGroupwaveGroupwave


Horse
Reply
Joined Nov 2003
The original gay....
> bubble2 8,038 Posts
649 Reputation
HeyLookItsMe
09-18-2012 at 10:57 PM.
09-18-2012 at 10:57 PM.
Quote from jj.12321 :
Yep, I agree.
It seems that many bars were thriving when smoking was allowed.
If there was such a demand for non-smoking bars, how come few (if any) were ever started.
Seems like it would've been very profitable to have the only non-smoking bar in town if that's what people really wanted.
Oh yea, it was people that DIDN'T GO TO BARS that decided smoking should not be allowed in them. laugh out loud
So they pass this ban.. In our city, businesses suffered because all the smokers started patronizing bars outside the city.. So the fix was to ban smoking in the whole state.. laugh out loud Brilliant!

Why can't each individual bar decide to be smoking or non-smoking (same with resturants)?
Because you are oversimplifying a complex problem. The smoke affects neighboring businesses (shared walls) and employees as well. Furthermore we as a society pass laws to try and improve our community as a whole. Laws about how food should be stored and handled by a restaurant. What's that? You don't want beef that's stored in a toilet bowl then don't eat at that restaurant.

These laws are made to try to reduce public health problems (the closing of bath houses etc). Hell by the logic you are posing we should let kids smoke

Yes the laws are NOT fair for smokers
Reply
Joined Nov 2003
The original gay....
> bubble2 8,038 Posts
649 Reputation
HeyLookItsMe
09-18-2012 at 11:03 PM.
09-18-2012 at 11:03 PM.
Quote from jj.12321 :
Yep, I agree.
It seems that many bars were thriving when smoking was allowed.
If there was such a demand for non-smoking bars, how come few (if any) were ever started.
Seems like it would've been very profitable to have the only non-smoking bar in town if that's what people really wanted.
Oh yea, it was people that DIDN'T GO TO BARS that decided smoking should not be allowed in them. laugh out loud
So they pass this ban.. In our city, businesses suffered because all the smokers started patronizing bars outside the city.. So the fix was to ban smoking in the whole state.. laugh out loud Brilliant!

Why can't each individual bar decide to be smoking or non-smoking (same with resturants)?
Quote from chewspam :
Facepalm That doesn't work. That's like saying I can smoke on someone else's property as long as I don't blow it on another person's property. And, yes, my point still stands. Come on to my property and fire all you want on my property. Now we are on firearm rights, property rights, and healthy rights (<- not even a real right). Nono

And I'm an on/off smoker. I still think it's disgusting, but sometimes, there's nothing more relaxing.....especially after a 10 mile run. laugh out loud
Health is a real right

(1) Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.
Reply

Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.

Joined Aug 2012
Permanently Banned
> bubble2 62 Posts
12 Reputation
youknowdis
09-18-2012 at 11:12 PM.
09-18-2012 at 11:12 PM.
Can't you get away with using electronic cigarettes? My employer encourages them here in southern California. Right now you can save 35% off an cigarette kit at http://www.electroniccigarettefast.com with coupon code - 35offkit
Reply
Page 7 of 8
Start the Conversation
 
Link Copied

The link has been copied to the clipboard.