I find it mildly infuriating that some coworkers think entering a break room gives them license to play loud music over speakers, use obscene language (especially to and about other coworkers), and disrupt the fifteen minutes of peace and quiet some of us crave in the workplace.
I also can’t stand the fact that smokers can take unlimited ‘breaks’ whenever they please just to come back stinking up an entire room with their smoke.
I do agree with OP on the thing about smokers though. You shouldn’t get special privileges just because you’re a drug addict.
Maybe OP should just go out for smoke breaks and not actually smoke
Lmao! Do you call tea and coffee drinkers “drug addicts” too?! Yup, smoke breaks should either be deducted from the allotted lunch break, or all employees should be allowed to step outside for 5 mins or whatever.
I’m sorry but comparing coffee/tea to nicotine is like comparing OTC Tylenol to illegally obtained oxycodone.
I can still work while drinking coffee or tea. Smokers get to go outside and smoke for 10-15 minutes while NOT working and get paid for that time.
go outside for a break then. who says youre not a smoker?
r/whoooosh
what did i miss?
take a break when the smokers do. just go outside. who says you dont smoke?
The number of breaks allotted to those who smoke was not the point.
I moved into my own place to get away from habitual smokers, yet I’m forever doing laundry to get someone else’s smoke out of my clothes.
oh i thought cuz you were mad about their unlimited breaks that was a factor for you
sounds like the amount of breaks for them dont matter then, its just that they’re stinky. which is fair. but you can get the breaks just the same if you wanted. maybe getting out for some fresh air would be good for you
It depends on how often they use their drug and how they act about it. If you can’t function and treat people like shit because you haven’t had your coffee/tea yet, you’re a drug addict.
This is an emotionally manipulative tactic, and not a great look. It’s no different than calling copyright infringement “theft”, abortion “murder”, or someone who speeds a “criminal”.
Note that you’re not wrong. People that get cranky if they don’t get enough caffeine are probably feeling some withdrawals from it, and caffeine is a drug, but calling those people “drug addicts” leverages the emotional connotation from it’s more colloquial usage. If you can’t support your stance without emotional manipulation, you don’t have much of a stance, yeah?
Who am I manipulating? It’s just my opinion.
You attempted to manipulate anyone that reads your comments into agreeing with your opinion.
Don’t play dumb. It’s also not a good look.
No, I don’t expect people to agree with me. I know my opinion is very unpopular. I don’t care.
Not unpopular here matey!
Then there’s no reason to be emotionally manipulative. If you were being honest right now, there would have been no reason to use the term “because they’re drug addicts” in your comment. The gist of the comment doesn’t change when that phrase is removed. It’s just not as emotionally manipulative.
My opinion is that they are drug addicts. My opinion is also that being a drug addict is not something that should grant someone special privileges. How is that “emotionally manipulative”? I am not manipulating anyone.