ewerk

you said people go to Tescos to shop and go to pubs to relax I can't see how that excuses discrimination in who gets to work where tbh There's no discrimination in who gets to work there, just a difference in who might want to work there. It's the same in any job, if you don't like the conditions then don't work there.

I've already explained to you why there's a difference in smoking in Tesco and smoking in a bar, surely you can see the difference? And define socially unacceptable, I wouldn't say people are frowned upon in pubs for lighting up.

Tax on tobacco raises £10.5bn a year, NHS expenditure on smoking related illnesses is £1.7bn, those figures come from an anti-smoking website. http://www.ash.org.uk/html/smuggling/html/whytax99.html The argument that smokers cost the NHS money is a false one.

People don't go to Tesco to relax and have a good time, they go there to shop, people do go to the pub to have a smoke and a drink, it's socially accepted. it's a job involving exposure to people who might smoke, there's no difference from an employment perspective and as for socially acceptable, don't make me laugh, you're living in the fifties Every job exposes you to people who might smoke, there's a difference between where it is and isn't socially acceptable. Are you telling me that it's socially unacceptable to smoke in a bar? I've never seen anyone get shit for having a cigarette in a pub.

So the chairman basically says Big Sam wouldn't be good enough to get their job now, and says Lee is the reason for signing the players and did the coaching and Allardyce is supposed to say nothing to defend hismelf and his achievements at Bolton!!! If somebody slates you like that then you're more than entitled to respond and defend yourself. If he has a problem with what Gartside said then he should give him a call and talk to him himself, comments like this just add fuel to the fire. In general Allardyce is too keen to talk to the media, on this occasion I don't think anyone is taking Gartside's comments too seriously, everyone in football knows that Allardyce was the driving force behind Bolton's success.

Surely you mean sunderland?

People don't go to Tesco to relax and have a good time, they go there to shop, people do go to the pub to have a smoke and a drink, it's socially accepted.

Another possible attack?

If you haven't been a smoker then you perhaps don't realise how satisfying it is to sit down with a fag and a pint, it adds to the pub experience. Thankfully I don't know how great it is. As a non smoker I do know how shit it is to have some selfish prat blowing smoke in your face though. My fault though, if I go to pubs I should expect and accept this sort of thing happening. Again I refer you to my earlier point that if so many people felt so strongly then there would be more smoke free pubs around.

If you haven't been a smoker then you perhaps don't realise how satisfying it is to sit down with a fag and a pint, it adds to the pub experience.

If I want to be a City trader I know that long hours and high levels of stress are involved, this could impact on my health, life and relationships but again these risks are well known so if I went into that line of work I accept these risks. Police face the chance of being killed or injured, body protection and guns for all the police would reduce the risk yet aren't issued. Soldiers face the risk of being blown up in road side bombs yet aren't all supplied with bomb-proof vehicles. Passive smoking is an occupational hazard, if you don't like it then don't work in a bar, as I have said, there are plenty of alternative jobs.

Well that's the way it has been for as long as pubs and tobacco has been around, as I said there are plenty of jobs with risks involved, no one has the right to have their 100% ideal job. As I already said, if there was such a demand for smoke-free bars then this would have been corrected by the free market and there would be more of them around.

As I said in my last post, it's part and parcel of the job. If they don't like it then don't work in a bar, it's not fucking rocket science. People talk of bar work as if it's impossible to find another job in different conditions.

Why shouldn't they? They are fully aware of the risks and conditions involved, fuck me why can't people be allowed to make decisions for themselves? It's part and parcel of bar work.

Well why can't they find a job in a supermarket, restaurant or any other sort of non-smokey environment, working in a bar is hardly a vocation.

My problem with it is it is a case of legislation going too far, no one is forced to go into or to work in a pub. If the demand from the public for smoke-free bars was really so strong then more bars would have voluntarily banned smoking or expanded smoke free areas.

About as useful as his last tip iirc.

I'm no longer a smoker, I gave up when the smoking ban came into effect here but I'm still against the ban in principle.

But these pubs were popular. Also the reaction of the smoking NAZI's would put anyone off. And lastly if you live in Ireland what has it got to do with you? So you're saying that smoke free bars are already popular? Great! Then there's no need for a smoking ban as people who are put off by smoke are already catered for. And because I live in Ireland I'm not allowed to have an opinion on the matter? You recently posted an article regarding a united Ireland, what the fuck has that got to do with you?

Among the general drinking public is the desire to ban smoking as strong as the desire to retain the right to have a pint and a fag? I don't think so, if the public really demanded smoke free bars then why hasn't the market catered to this demand through more pubs going smoke free voluntarily? Surely if the ban really had the public's support then these smoke free establishments would already exist?

What about alcohol? People are attacked because of people under the influence, families can be torn apart because of alcoholism, the NHS spends millions each year on alcohol related illnesses, so let's ban it too. While we're at it why not ban chocolate, crisps and fried food, it would certainly help with the obesity problem. Where do we stop?

They accept that it is a risk of the job, or at least should do. Of course they take precautions to avoid injury but shouldn't they go further to eliminate the risk? Full body armour at all times, bomb proof vehicles at all times etc etc, there is much that can be done to reduce risk of injury or illness in all jobs but many of the solutions are impractical but because the smoking ban doesn't put any of the inconvenience or cost on the government they think it's ok.

You keep saying this yet haven't answered my earlier point as to why the government should protect these people when they've chosen to take the job with the full knowledge of how it could impact on their health. because there is now a general rule in this country that no one should have to accept reducable risks to gain employment Every risk is essentially reducible. This is the sort of shit that has meant firemen can't go up ladders over a certain height. If you don't want the risk of dying in a burning building then don't join the fire brigade, if you don't fancy being shot at then don't join the army and if you don't want to accept the increased risk of smoke related problems then don't work in a bar. It's pretty fucking simple.

You keep saying this yet haven't answered my earlier point as to why the government should protect these people when they've chosen to take the job with the full knowledge of how it could impact on their health.