View Full Version : What do you do and why?
Your new boss invites himself to dinner, at your house on short notice (he tells you a 2pm that he's doing it). You call the significant other and arrange it with some difficulty. When your boss arrives, two hours late, he walks in and lights up a cigarette and asks for a an ashtray.
A. Tell him to get his smelly cigarette butt out of your house, whilst castigating him for his temerity and complete lack of manners.
B. Light up and join him motioning towards the 2 gallon butt can on the coffee table.
C. Find some something that will work, accepting the fact that some people somke, while others don't, in spite of the evidence against smoking, while hoping you can get ulphostery cleaned, later.
D. Just stand there slackjawed, not knowing what to do or say, as he begins a monolog about how there is no real evidence medical against smoking or ETS (Environmental Tobacco Smoke) in the first place...
Toss the sucker out. Kick him in the nuts too. Maybe when you toss him out, see if you can have him land in dog crap. You can get another job. Your home is yours.
03-12-02, 07:10 AM
Do bosses invite themselves to dinner? That's never happened to me in roughly a decade of working.
03-12-02, 07:40 AM
Originally posted by Adam
...see if you can have him land in dog crap.Don't know why, but I got a major visual. Then I had to explain to co-workers why the hell I was laughing.
But to the question: not gonna happen. The boss will not invite himself to dinner because I would not allow him/her to do that. Now, if I were to invite him/her, I would let them know in advance (as I do whenever we have company that has not visited with us before) that our home is a smoke-free zone. We have the advantage of a covered deck, which we invite guests to use if they desire the ol' coffin nail.
What mrk is trying to do here is show how we would deal with a difficult situation.
Trying to claim it wouldn't happen or showing ways round it is just trying to change the rules of the problem so you don't have to deal with the question.
The real question is, do you stand by your principles or do you give in to a tyrant?
If you value waelth above principles then the logical choice is to give in to a tyrant and live with your low standards.
If your personal self-respect is important then you will kick him out. You might lose out short term but you will have considerble self-esteem that will be of value later.
Always stay true to your values, but you need to have at least already determined your values. If you have no such values then you are likely to be kicked around all your life.
03-12-02, 11:23 AM
Originally posted by Cris
What mrk is trying to do here is show how we would deal with a difficult situation.As a thought exercise, the choice is too limiting for me. If someone fires up without asking, they are politely asked to extinguish it or politely asked to leave.
:( Guess I can't play. :)
03-12-02, 11:30 AM
[QUOTE]As a thought exercise, the choice is too limiting for me. If someone fires up without asking, they are politely asked to extinguish it or politely asked to leave.[QUOTE]
Thats what I would do. Even though I smoke, I dont smoke in my house, and I would NEVER light up in someone else's house:D
Hey, my quote thingy isnt working:mad:
You didn't use /QUOTE inside the end bracket.
Take care ;)
03-13-02, 03:27 AM
I am with *stRgrl* here.
03-14-02, 02:08 PM
We have a smoking area outside for guests who smoke and that's where my boss would smoke if I had one.
And that's that 'cause I'm the boss.:eek:
03-14-02, 02:45 PM
I am with *stRgrl* here.
Well slap my face and paint me red! Never thought Id here that from you:D
03-14-02, 04:01 PM
:) That's allright, *stRgrl*.
I do not hold anything against you personally. Do you?
03-14-02, 04:05 PM
Of course not, dont be ridiculous! I like being called dumb:D That was a joke. I hold no ill-will to anyone on the board, including you. The thing I like about people that dont agree with me (and get upset over the things I say), is that, you give me a passion to keep digging into facts about what I believe. So see, your actually just making me smarter:D
03-15-02, 03:46 AM
The thing I like about people that dont agree with me (and get upset over the things I say), is that, you give me a passion to keep digging into facts about what I believe. So see, your actually just making me smarter
Hey... that was my line!
or wasn't it?
Most people get annoyed by me. They just do not believe me when I state something similar to what you just said.
Okay folks, I set this up the WAY I did for a reason, and then I let you decide which way it was going to go. So far on about 5 people have actually voted, yet I have 37 (exaggeration) opinions-Sounds like I asked 3 rabbis for an opinoin of one tractate (verse). The actual LACK of flames surprises me. I thought I would be hitting a LOT more hot buttons than I did. Given the way I wrote, it I wasn't even sure it would squeeze by the moderator. I don't have any of HIS hate mail so it must have been okay.
It was two things actually. It was first a simple thought exercise, and there actually was a hidden agenda How many of you smoke (and or don't mind other's doing it. As a thought exercise I wanted to see who would and who wouldn't stand by their principles even when their LIFE was at stake. This was none too much concealed it was pretty obvious (the boss is a complete a*shole, or idiot; either is apparent by his complete uncouth manner). Perhaps I should have amended it with a sentence of how you were a NEW hire and recently anointed as the "fair haired" Lass/lady or "New young Turk"-take your pick. I thought it was obvious; apparently, I failed.
As to the "hidden" agenda, I was conducting a poll as to how many of you actually smoke or don't care if someone else does (as it was in the USA until the infamous "Surgeon General's Warning". Actually (even though the sample remains small) it parallels the "real" numbers that existed in 1964 when the Surgeon General FIRST issued his ill conceived, inadequately researched "findings". Some people smoked, most didn't, and it was JUST something that others did (to seem sophisticated or because they enjoyed it) or did not. NO, one of course did not smoke in most other peoples houses, you pulled your pack and offered one to your host. At that point you were either POLITELY asked NOT to smoke, or they found you an ashtray (and aired out the house later, which seems to be something no longer conceivable).
Before I get a bunch of gas bout the zillions of medical studies that PROVE that smoking is, if not lethal at least harmful. Let me say that EVERY one of them is a small sampling JUST like this one, given the millions of people in the world who choose to smoke (and choose to remain "hooked" as I do). In every one of these reports and case studies, it comes down to how cigarette smoking MAY be a contributing factor to many medical conditions (while having to actually have benefited both Parkinson's and Alzheimer's-both are dopamine deficient conditions, with other factors as yet unknown-but smoking CANNOT be SPECIFICALLY attributed as a causative link to the condition(s) that they are observing. This includes COPD (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or emphysema) and or lung cancer. The deliberate misleading of the general masses, keeps millions of people employed with higher than average wages. It is "big" business, every bit as much as tobacco is.
It is a FACT that Zyban has killed MORE people on a PER captia basis than cigarettes are misatrtbutted-period, but it's okay, and smoking isn't (because it is offensive). It remains politically expedient to kowtow to the pharmaceutical lobbies opposed to the tobacco.
To those who don't like my choices, allow me to explain them. Life is LIKE that, a lot (it's two words to those who insist upon pretending that Random House prints a dictionary) of time, it throws you both problems and solutions and you LIKE neither.
First of all, I presume that I am talking to the "average audience" of 20 something's with a wife/husband/"significant other/main squeeze, two point three kids, a dog (and maybe a puddytat-I like puddytats). They "own" their home, the mortgage (death pay) payments of which constitutes 28% of their gross income. They pay on average 54% state and federal income tax. Like 84% of the populace of the USA, they are about 63 days away from abject poverty and homelessness, because they are spending 140% of their "net income" per annum, as "encouraged by the Moron Machine. (Somebody told me they call it a TV (I'd asked them about the pictures in the small box). I don't own one so I woudn't know. I also made it VERY clear that YOU had NO choice in the matter, HE was coming to dinner on short notice, (this in and of itself) points out how totalitarian he is.
The totalitarian aspect of the issues was yet another point I wanted to make. Many do what we are told to do, just because we are told to do it, e.g.: quit smoking… grin. Others may well REFUSE to do what they are told to do just because they were TOLD, instead of being asked, nicely--any takers? Then, there are those who actually consider the events and choose. While the poll was EXCEPTIONALLY limited, this is WHY there is a discussion thread in the first place. You pays you money and takes you chanced, and then you "vetch" (it's Yiddish). Some people pronounce it with a "b" and VERY short e…*grin*.
1. Throw him out: This can be done as politely or impolitely as you choose, depending upon your breeding and manners. It could include saying, "um, er, boss, I guess you don't know, but we don't smoke here. Uh, can I put that out for you? You could choose to tell him where to put his smoke…
2. Fire up and join him, motioning to the 2 gallon butt kick on the coffee table (you smoke and you don't care).
3. Find him something that will do, and HOPE you clean the upholstery. You accommodate him for your job's sake (knowing you WILL lose it if you don't). After you hit the $20/hr rate, walking down the street and getting the same, or more, may well take more than 63 days these days and you are on the streets without help from SOMEHWHERE.
4. Stand there slackjawed-this was one of the several kickers; I really expected a lot of you guys and gals to take this one and run wild (judging from what I've read on this forum) no one really did.
Adam: You're fired, and homeless. I'm sorry, YOU lose. You may discover that if you have a good enough "gaff" you can make MORE money selling pens on a street corner and NOT pay taxes…
1. You have the right Idea. His 'house', his rule; your house, YOUR rule but… how is he going to take it, and is it going to affect your job? Can you AFFORD to offend this complete and totall Jerk (Koff?)
2. This is an alternative; but it brings us back to the same question.
*Blushing, whilst shuffling feet* Why thank you.
stRgrl: I light up in other peoples houses all the time (I find the ashtray with BUTS or ashes and buts in a trash can first, though, or I wait for them to forget to ask me to join them… grin-anyone who does smoke in their own house, doesn't care if you do. They may care if it is NOT tobacco, though, I know a NUMBER of people who would thrash me soundly for smoking tobacco in their homes but they don't think TWICE about firing up the old water pipe… (and some are dragging down 4 figure salaries, too). I have my choiced, they theirs, and I figure it's THEIR life. This was one of the points no body touched on. (uh, did you know that W.H.O. (World Health Organization) studied 3000 non-smoking spouses of smokers and non-somokers for 8 years and finally gave up in disgust when they found out that the non-smoking spouses of smokers WERE AT NO GREATER MEDICAL RISK than their counterparts?
Blond_cupid: If you don't want to play, nice, don't play.
Well I can see it is deteriorating to my inactive monitoring it. I just wanted to see what would happen if I put some people in a room and told them there was a bomb, the doors were locked and the 13 minutes left. I wish I'd been surprised…
Thanks for playing, Any comments? You have the addy or the thread, either is fine (I know all the words, I just choose (mostly) not to use them. So feel free or constrained, the options, are of course, yours.
P.S. OF course I'm arrogant. If I weren't I wouldn't be posting my opinions (which are just like noses; everyone has one: most smell) to a forum, now would I?
03-17-02, 01:39 AM
In this case i thought it was more a Stand up for what you belive in sort of thing (course in Australia the boss would be in trouble for unfair dismisal if he fired you for that but even without that) Your House Your Rules if he dosn't like it hes not a good enough employer anyway and you wont be happy their so what the hell.
The primary thing is DO you stand up to YOUR prinicples?
Meanwhile not one single voter has admitted he smokes (cigarettes). I've already alluded to how it is MORE socially acceptable to smoke POT than cigarettes.
Secondarially, WHOM do you allow to SET your principles (your parents, the media, the medical community, your boss, the gov't, or you?). What do you base your decisions upon?
Thirdly, the issue was for me to determine for myself, who realy cared and who didn't. It's still running 60-40 against as it did in 1964 more or less.
Smoking has NOT been proven to be medically linked to ANY disease (In fact it has been proven to reduce symtoms of both Altzheimers, and Parkinson's diseases), as THC has been PROVEN to assist in Chronic Pain mangement, AIDS, Gloucoma, and a number of other medical issues, yet you find the feds shutting down the LAWFUL clinics that issue it, faster than they can open up.
ETS has been proven by WHO to NOT represent any serious medical risk. It wasn't what they wanted to find, but they did publish the result (and bury it).
The US federal courts took the EPA white paper on ETS and shredded it, because it was was scienficially unsound, and the USJustice Department has YET to appeal that ruling--although it's now too late. Subsequently the W.H.O. TRIED to PROVE the EPA white paper was correct (although unfounded) and FAILED.
Various US agencies have spent literally BILLIONS of dollars over the past forty years to TRY to prove that smoking was medical/physically harmful not only to the somkers themselves, but to others. NOW since they have failed, (or back in the senventies when became apparaent they would fail) they began a HUGE propaganda mill to turn public opoinion, relying heavily upon media and the christian fundmentalists to lead the hue and cry. Joe Sixpack (formerly Camel who was murdered by morons) doesn't know spit about statistics. He does know that the talking head said that "Some study said anyone who looks at a package of cigarettes will die of cancer" When in fact what was actually said was that a smoker as a 100% greater chance than a non smoker, meaning that the relative risk factor is 1, which is considered to be negligable.
CA attempted to pass a law making ALL cigarette packs printed in only black and white. The idea was that it would take so long for the clerk to find YOUR brand of the 200 he has to choose, that it would become literally impossible to sell them at all. It was soundly defeated. However some idiot bimbo city council woman in LA managed to get all the parks NON-Smoking--"It's for the children" whine, whine--sounds to me like she needs some cheeze and crakers to go with it.
Okay, now that I've spouted off and stated my piece, let me say WHY this has happened. the reason is simple 600 billion dollars a year. That's what the medical insdustry makes. THEY can sell synthetic nicotinics for far more profit than the tobacco companies EVER dreamed. The whole puppose is to hook the remaining somkers who don't want to quit on synthetic nicotinics and phase out ciggarettes altogether. YOU buy your Zyban for 10 bucks (You pay 45, but 35 is picked up by your insurance carrier--who pays the premiums?). The ONLY problem with Zyban is it actually does kill people. It most likely will be banned completely shortly. It's all not for naught, though, they (pharmecutical comapanies) will come out with a new replacement which is less toxic... just as they did with the gum--morons should made it taste decently...
03-20-02, 12:01 PM
Just a quick one Mr. K - three questions:
1. What exactly do u mean by "smoking has not been proven to be medically linked to any disease"? There are studies which say there are - how much would it take to convince you?
2. Do you honestly think that smoking is not bad for you?
3. If someone was in your presence (regardless of location), and you were smoking - if they objected for any of the following reasons, would you stop?
-They have asthma and it makes them choke
-They don't have asthma and it makes them choke
-They find the smell repulsive
-They are about to go be amongst people who find the smell repulsive, and smoke smell stays
-They believe (as did Roy Castle) that passive smoking is a medical risk, and don't want to risk it
-They had a close friend die of passive smoking and feel personally offended by your behaviour
There's nothing I enjoy more than having a cigarette while watching
a beautiful sunset from a hilltop about thirty five miles from the city
over which hangs a tan pall of pollution, a city in which I would not
be permitted to smoke in 'public places'.
The madness of it all.
Take care ;)
03-20-02, 01:45 PM
Fair play to you. I have no objection to people smoking - and if it increases your quality of life, I think you owe it to yourself to smoke. However, my questions were about smoking in the company of people who disapprove, and the health aspect.
03-21-02, 04:40 AM
Somewhere else I stated something similar. It was about dirty things in food.
Do you know what pollution and dirt you take in just by breathing- especially in a city?!.
I do, and that's why "The madness of it all!" comment.
Take care :rolleyes:
03-23-02, 03:30 AM
that was a rethorical question Chagur. :)