Battle against vaping vs unreliable terms and conditions Please help!!!

[Smok-ey]

Good day Vapors,
I am only a small individual trying to make a different in my life and in the life of others. I have recently been told by up-management to stop vaping, vaping meaning stealth vaping and not letting anyone know I am vaping around me, and that this could lead to consequences.

Now I did do my research, thanks to most of you right here also trying to make a difference, and presented strong arguments to management. The reason of my calling for help is that, well need help in formulating my rebottle and where else to go other than here with professional opinions and statistical facts or just plain common sense.

Here is my story:

I have been a smoker for 21 years and recently been introduced to vaping. Yes it was hard doing the transition from one pack to a pack and a half a day to, as of now, non-smoking for two days straight. I am getting there. Since a month ago, I have been vaping in my office, public establishment, with no complaints and even people coming up asking for information. Proud me, I have made two smokers into vaping client braking almost their habits of cigarettes. “Two thumbs up”.

I told my manager that I was vaping and occasionally using it quietly in my workstation without “blowing” my vapor around to catch attention. He approved and congratulated me on braking my cigarette habit. I informed him that, from the email sent to Health Canada, my workplace and Health and Safety’s responsible, that no illegal act was committed on my behalf and that their statement always return to the same rebottle: “Smoking falls under the Tabaco By-Law and is not prohibited on public establishment” and I should consult the by-Law acts and regulations” in Canada.

Two weeks ago, my manager approached me with the following information: “You need to stop vaping as they have found that the vapor contains metal substance and could be a health hazard to public health and safety”

Now, I am not starting trouble nor intent to fight a losing battle with a law that doesn’t exist. I have sent him information that contradicts the law within our organization and with Health Canada’s advisory letter sent out in 2009.

Here is what I have at the moment.

I have recently sent a letter to my employer asking the terms and conditions about using electronic cigarette at my workplace and any information related to the Health and Safety of my co-workers. They replied with the following: Please keep in mind that I have removed any names from these discussions for confidential purposes except for parties such as Health Canada and other related parties with non-confidential information that could be provided to public.

Me: Could you please provide me information on the terms and conditions, laws or restrictions from using an electronic cigarette device in the workplace.

Party: please refer to the Health Canada instruction and letter sent to management:

“It has been determined by Health Canada that this product falls within the scope of the Food and Drugs Act. Also, as indicated in a Health Canada Advisory [url]http://www.healthycanadians.gc.ca/recall-alert-rappel-avis/hc-sc/2009/13373a-eng.php[/URL], this type of product, when it contains nicotine, is not authorized in Canada. For this reason and for lack of information on their effects, vapour or electronic cigarettes should not be permitted in the work place.

Until such time as Health Canada determines that the product is safe and based on this information Management determines that they can be used in the workplace the use of e-cigarettes in the workplace is not authorized.

Your continued support in this matter is appreciated.”

Now if you read this you will find my frustration and reply to the party (Employer)

I have stated the following for review:

• In the web link provided, this link is archived (March 27, 2009) with no new updates;
• Health Canada is advising Canadians not to purchase or use electronic smoking products, therefore I cannot see any rules and regulation on this part. Advising someone is not within any laws not prohibits any concrete rules.
• …May pose risks such as nicotine poisoning and addiction. So as large quantity of coffee, which includes caffeine. No scientific proven document is available to conduct these allegations, meaning nicotine has never been proven to be a health factor, hence, nicotine as been proven to have positive effects.
• Electronic smoking products, including their nicotine cartridges, must be kept out of the reach of children at all times, given the risk of choking or nicotine poisoning. Nicotine is hazardous to the health and safety of certain segments of the population such as children, youth, pregnant women, nursing mothers, people with heart conditions, and the elderly. ABSOLUTLY, and I agree but this is not a law but instructions.
• Canadians who have used e-cigarette products and are concerned about their health should consult with a health care practitioner. I did and my doctor is all for me vaporing away instead of smoking cigarettes and having over 4000 chemicals inhaled in my lungs and could be beneficial to my health.

Now by looking at this I have re-sent a letter to my employer mentioning that there is nothing in here that could help me decide if the law on vapor is not authorized in my workplace.

My employer told me to seek Health Canada for additional information.

Health Canada:
Same questions same reply but only to provide me with the following, and I quote:

“Regarding the use of e-cigarettes in public places, this falls under the responsibility of the provincial or municipal/local authorities rather than Health Canada. These authorities are best placed to advice on the application of smoking bans or by-laws on the electronic cigarettes.”

Now, I had the courage to contact my municipal/local authorities in Gatineau and this is what I was told, by the way this was sent to the Gatineau Police for complaints and by-law instructions:

Quote: “There is no law and no regulation on E-Cigarette nor is there a band in effect. For your workplace questions I would suggest to make sure you inform your co-workers that it is not a cigarette nor that is a health issue what so ever from vaping in the air of your workplace. Please don’t make it obvious to go up to someone and vape in their faces as this is just rude. As for the by-law question, there is nothing prohibiting you for vaping away. By the way I would rather have you vapor than smoke”

Brought to you by your local Police Officer.

Now to go a little further, I have decided to reply this to my manager. The following was provided to me on his behalf:

“Hi, for clarity the restriction not to use e-cigarettes in the workplace comes from Management.”

Ok so far nothing telling me I cannot use my device in the workplace.

So decided to go even further by contacting my Establishment representative (Owner of the establishment)

Me: “Could you please provide me accurate information on the restrictions of using electronic cigarette in the workplace?”
If I continue you will need to go to the top of this page to read over and over again from my employer, to Health Canada and then back to my manager’s reply”

Yet I cannot find anything restricting me or prohibiting me from vaping at the office.

Why I am doing this…Someone has filed a complaint against me saying that I am polluting the air quality by using my electronic cigarette.

I am I fighting for nothing? I am trying to make sense of this fictional restriction with no laws attached to them while people are telling me Yes you can, No you can’t.

Last time I checked I had human rights. And if I go with the chains of emails sent to me, nowhere you can find a restriction…only “suggestions” on not using this device.

I am not in a legal position to argue but if you look at this, yes yes it is ridiculous, but nothing, but nothing except “Health Canada suggesting” me, us to not use this device.

What would be my next step? Asking HC to provide me legal documents for air quality facts? Is this considered Harassment in the workplace?

I feel like I am fighting with 20 feet tall monsters that has no information to provide me and when I provide them with contradicting facts, they call upon false accusation with no proof yet with no facts and legitimate reply.

 

[retired1]

In short, your employer can set whatever terms they want, including banning vaping in the workplace. There doesn't have to be a law regarding vaping. Your employer can set whatever rules they want, as long as it conforms to existing law. And banning vaping in the workplace would definitely fall under this category.

 

[Smok-ey]

Yes I agree, but setting the rules as...Should not be considered... is not a term nor a condition. Should only state a maybe he should not vape. Now adding a Must to this will change the hole perspective of the phrase... Must not be used in the workplace.

In accordance to Health Canada... Well if you look at health Canada policy, which mentions nothing of not vaping and only states "vapour or electronic cigarettes should not be permitted in the work place." only but change it to vapour or electronic cigarettes must not be permitted in the work place...

Playing with words can have a big impact to this phrase.

 

[Smile n' shine]

I certainly can empathize with you, but an employer has a duty of care to provide a safe work environment. If you can rationally attempt to convince them that
vaping has the same components as air, you will win your case. Though, this may not be likely. It is called being stuck between a rock and a hard place.
I do find it peculiar there was no concern previous to reading about the "metal" study. Perhaps if you can find info to the contrary, to bring to management,
they will reconsider vaping at work.
Only my 2 cents.


PS. Thanks for sharing your experience and all your findings, the police input is rather interesting on the matter. So nice they added what is considered rude behaviour, I may have never known.

 

[danfinger]

Why I am doing this…Someone has filed a complaint against me saying that I am polluting the air quality by using my electronic cigarette.

So this is right here is the problem. Air quality. I'm sure Dr.Ma is going to chime in and insist that the vape breath emanating from his lips is more pure than an alpine breeze but your complaining coworker isn't a fan. Most people when they think of good air quality would not characterize it as smelling of candy apple or cinnamon or peanut butter chocolate cookie dough. Most people think of good air as being completely without any odor at all. Whoever complained is being disturbed by whatever it is that you are vaping. Your vape could have the benefit of curing cancer, herpes and regrowing hair on bald heads- but it is still an annoyance.

Last time I checked I had human rights.

Can you point to me anywhere, in any country, in any 'declared rights' document which states that as humans, we have the "right" to vape? I'd love to see that. Otherwise, equating vaping with say, freedom of speech or freedom of assembly or trial by jury is just kind of silly. You might have the right to be annoying, that doesn't mean you should exercise that right- especially at work. Your employer isn't paying you to annoy your coworker, he's paying you to do your job and help the company be successful. You should do that instead of petulantly stomping your feet and arguing with the people who put the meat on your table.

 

[Rickajho]

Can you point to me anywhere, in any country, in any 'declared rights' document which states that as humans, we have the "right" to vape? I'd love to see that. Otherwise, equating vaping with say, freedom of speech or freedom of assembly or trial by jury is just kind of silly. You might have the right to be annoying, that doesn't mean you should exercise that right- especially at work. Your employer isn't paying you to annoy your coworker, he's paying you to do your job and help the company be successful. You should do that instead of petulantly stomping your feet and arguing with the people who put the meat on your table.

Might I suggest that the very same thing can be said of the person who filed the complaint?

 

[danfinger]

Might I suggest that the very same thing can be said of the person who filed the complaint?

Not really. That person did not claim a human right. That person spoke to their higher ups and likely said something along the lines of "this is disrupting my ability to do my job". And management acted accordingly. And rightly so in my opinion. Unless OP's job description included vaping in the office, then that ain't what he's getting paid for.

 

[Rickajho]

Smok-ey have you look at the resources available on CASAA? There is a lot of information there that can help to rebut blatant falsehoods passed around about vaping and exhaled vapor.

Learn About Electronic Cigarettes
Lab Reports: ecigarettes
CASAA Printable Material

 

[Rickajho]

Not really. That person did not claim a human right. That person spoke to their higher ups and likely said something along the lines of "this is disrupting my ability to do my job". And management acted accordingly. And rightly so in my opinion. Unless OP's job description included vaping in the office, then that ain't what he's getting paid for.

I hate the color pink. So if I complain about someone wearing pink in the office and claim "this is disrupting my ability to do my job" that's all it takes? Really? Are we all supposed to just roll over no matter what level the absurdity of the complaint rises to? "Metal particles" and all that jazz?

 

[danfinger]

I hate the color pink. So if I complain about someone wearing pink in the office and claim "this is disrupting my ability to do my job" that's all it takes? Really? Are we all supposed to just roll over no matter what level the absurdity of the complaint rises to? "Metal particles" and all that jazz?

Well look at it from the boss's perspective. He likely knows with reasonable certainty that pink clothing is not a health concern and tell you to just get over it. But if you continue to push the issue he's got two choices, ban pink or tell you to take your pink-hatin self to an office that shares that hate. Which do you think he's going to choose?

We've all got choices. OP could quit if he wants to vape that badly.

 

[DiagTech]

Imagine this scenario: In a time where smoking indoors is prohibited, consider the unknowing individual walking into an office with a haze of vapor and yelling out "FIRE!" resulting in panic. I work in an automotive garage and with a torch and welder being used, seeing "smoke" is never an issue. Even if it's just me vaping away.

From the info the OP gathered, legally they could vape away. Their job may be in jeopardy though.

 

[Smok-ey]

Despite of all my text, the only good thing absorbed within it is “Human Right”. I was actually talking about me wanting additional information from my job… and having the right information while not contradicting itself.

If you are talking about being pro-active by taking 15 smoke break instead of at desk doing actual work and vaping at the same time… I think that this constitute as providing more proactive work.

Vs smoking break and going outside with smokers…I don’t see the point as I am trying to quit the habit, but by annoying my co-workers by doing what? Vaping? In a closed space with close to no visible vapor?

But sure, I am just trying to make of sense to all of this and probably a “newbie” to the vapor world but I am looking for the best way to change this awesome contradicting law of banning vaporing in public places…

Best show yet so for would be the following:

Gutfeld: The stupidity of banning e-cigarettes - YouTube

 

[Smok-ey]

From the info the OP gathered, legally they could vape away. Their job may be in jeopardy though.

This is why I am looking for help in any way. In my head I am trying to make sense of it all, and maybe....maybe make a difference and to inform people that this is as less dangerous than using a microwave that, every establishments would, I hope so, be equipped with. Compared to Caffeine... we have red bull... but people are not has worried about this I guess.

 

[HMav]

From the OP's description of the issue, it seems that his workplace has no actual policy in place that says "No vaping allowed". When he sought guidance, he was told to refer to Health Canada, who suggested that he not vape at work and referred him to the local authorities, who have no problem with him vaping at work.

The issue here is that his employment is at risk because his immediate supervisor told him that management says no vaping, but management, when asked for guidance, effectively stated that they suggest he not not vape (via the deferral to Health Canada), but did not prohibit it.

Unfortunately I live in the US, so I can't speak for Canada. Here, if your employer suggests that you not do something at work, and you do it, they cannot fire you for cause. They may still terminate your employment (they can fire you simply because they don't like you if they wanted) but this will incur costs to them and they tend to avoid the hassle.

If there is a written policy, and this written policy forbids the use of your PV (by any name or reference) then the answer is no, you can't vape at work. If there is no written policy then you can still be fired for doing it, but the company cannot claim you were in violation of policy and they still have to pay for your unemployment because they fired you without cause.

You would be best served by not vaping at work. It is the polite and respectful thing to do in this circumstance.

If it were me, I'd start .....ing about anything and everything that you could expect an employer to do something about (other than what the boss does) and make such a paperwork mess that HR can't keep up, and when confronted I'd blame the mood swings from nicotine withdrawals caused not being able to vape at my desk, and admit that I feel bad not being able to be a team player anymore but that I can't continue to kill myself with cigarette smoke for that cause (and definitely point out that vaping helped you be a better team player and effective employee while apparently not being bothersome to your coworkers). I would also keep a copy of local outdoor air quality reports and the data from the vapor studies handy in case I get someones attention.

 

[retired1]

As an employer, if I were to ask you not to do something in the workplace, that would be the same as a prohibition, whether it's in writing or not. Failure to adhere to said policy would result in the individual finding gainful employment elsewhere.

 

[fourtytwo]

As a vaper of 2.5years, I still enjoy getting up and going for a smoke break with others.
I stand upwind and vape.
My colleagues are considerate and don't blow smoke at me and it gives me a chance to stretch my legs.
It is sometimes surprising how many decisions are made in such impromptu meetings...

 

[edyle]

long op and full of contradictions.

if

vaping meaning stealth vaping and not letting anyone know I am vaping around me

then how come somebody knows?

the manager approved, but then was it the same manager that objected or a different manager?


bottom line is the management has a right and responsibility to set reasonable standards.

 

[fourtytwo]

In short, your employer can set whatever terms they want, including banning vaping in the workplace. There doesn't have to be a law regarding vaping. Your employer can set whatever rules they want, as long as it conforms to existing law. And banning vaping in the workplace would definitely fall under this category.

This is as I often say, the lack of prohibition does not equate to permission.

I think a closer analogy might be an unwritten policy against wearing strong scents at the office.
It may not be illegal and there may not be an official written policy regarding strong scents but, it is generally wise to comply, if only out of consideration for others.
The workplace is slightly different then other places people go to. One does not generally go to the office wearing a Speedo. I would not consider playing death metal on a sound system in my cubical and lifting a cheek and breaking wind in a board meeting would not be my first choice.

I'm sorry to the OP but I think this cases illustrates one of the greatest dangers to vaping. Many people believe the advertising that some of the cig-alike manufacturers use.
No! You cannot vape wherever you like.

 

[Smok-ey]

Thank you all for the reply,

I am not defying the laws of gravity but only trying to go by the rules, where you can see in HC's warning letter has nothing mentioning not to vape.

You find loop holes and yes you will challenge them. Why, same reason a contract is written and, just one phrase, could mislead interpretation of this phrase changing the hole perspective of the contract. In my head, vaping is not a crime, vaping is not harmful to my colleagues. I could go on about other harmful product that people are using in the office but yet there would be no point.

I am not doing this for show nor to prove something, just to get the right information that clearly isn't there.

I guess everyone is different, some would love to go outside to show off vaping but some would rather stay away from trying to get back in the loop hole of smoking... Plus why in the hell should I go outside with smokers while vaping is not even close to poison?

I guess to each there own. Mine is to find laws that don't exist and challenge the one's that has written them.

In my case, drinking coffee could harm my colleagues because caffeine is another form of addiction. Or to bring fish at noon for lunch to eat at her/his desk. Seriously...because it looks like smoke it should be smoke.

I am just a little confused and looking for answers I guess. I don't think a little knowledge never hurts someone.

I guess we will soon find out.

 

[stevegmu]

If I owned a business and an employee were taking 15 smoke breaks, they would be fired...

It really sounds like your best move would be to find a new job- perhaps at a vape shop, if you can't go between breaks without a vape...