Email I got from my manager

[Vault]

I think the words "tongue in cheek" are lost on some people

The OP has his marching orders there in the email! Comply or else loose your job. There are no best options my reply was meant as light hearted observations with a bit of wit (that was obviously lost in translation!).

 

[jerzi]

I think the words "tongue in cheek" are lost on some people

The OP has his marching orders there in the email! Comply or else loose your job. There are no best options my reply was meant as light hearted observations with a bit of wit (that was obviously lost in translation!).

The best option would be to comply with rules and regulations, and take any issues you have to a commanding officer.

 

[wv2win]

Mangers have the authority to impose any restrictions that do not fall outside of company policy, such as restricting the use of something that could potentionally put others at a health risk.

But lying about an activity to impose that restriction does not make it ethically right. Why wasn't nicotine inhalers included in the ban? When exhaling after using a nicotine inhaler, there is an emission, just not one that is seen.

 

[MrStik]

If you are military, you should be familiar with the phrase "Suck it up and Drive on..." You can try to fight regulations in the military, and who knows... maybe in the future it will be overturned or amended, but long before you are given a less than honorable discharge for standing up. You may become some sort of martyr, but is it worth bagging groceries at a Walmart for the rest of your life? If it is worth it to you. FIGHT ON. If not, do your time and move on with your life.

 

[MrStik]

nvm-------------

 

[BostonVape]

lol 3rd hand smoke is sort of like this:

 

[jerzi]

But lying about an activity to impose that restriction does not make it ethically right. Why wasn't nicotine inhalers included in the ban? When exhaling after using a nicotine inhaler, there is an emission, just not one that is seen.

FDA has regulated it, unregulated uses of a product produce a major liability. I'm sure the ethical part of it isn't the reason, but the actual vapor and complaints. I'm not sure it's lying ,but I do think they pick and choose at their leisure, based on the disturbance it causes.

 

[wv2win]

I have to agree with her decision, Vapeing IMHO is a less dangerous alternative to smoking, and not intended to allow Vapeing anywhere we want to. Sorry just how I see it, her business etc......

I can agree that any business owner has the right to make policies for employment and activity on their premises, regardless if those policies are based on ignorance or not. But you stated you "agreed with her decision" which logically must endorse the premise the decision was based on, i.e., vaping is dangerours to others. If we follow your "thinking" to it's logical conclusion, then vaping must be viewed as being dangerous and kept as far away from others as possible. Thus, there is no need to provide factual evidence that vaping is not dangerous to others because the article which supports the manager's decision stated that vaping can be dangerous to others.

We should all just shup-up, stay in smoking sections and/or keep vaping hidden where it belongs and hope no one finds out what we do.

I should head over to the CASAA web site and stop my support. What a waste of time and money that has been.

 

[retired1]

FDA has regulated it, unregulated uses of a product produce a major liability. I'm sure the ethical part of it isn't the reason, but the actual vapor and complaints. I'm not sure it's lying ,but I do think they pick and choose at their leisure, based on the disturbance it causes.

The FDA has attempted to regulate it, and was thoroughly spanked in the courts as a result. There has been no "second attempt" as yet.

 

[jerzi]

The FDA has attempted to regulate it, and was thoroughly spanked in the courts as a result. There has been no "second attempt" as yet.

I thought nicotine inhalers were licensed and regulated by the FDA, my mistake.

 

[retired1]

I thought nicotine inhalers were licensed and regulated by the FDA, my mistake.

Ahh. As a medical device, yes, they're regulated. I thought you were referring to PVs in general.

 

[wv2win]

Oh, come on. Managers have the right to impose rules. That is why they are called "bosses." Instead of railing against her and saying she "needs to grow a pair" (REALLY???) you should start acting a little more professional and a LOT less entitled. Cigarettes used to be allowed in offices and businesses until they weren't. Until you open your own business and become the BOSS, you have to put up with others' rules of the workplace. That is why they call it "work."

I don't believe anyone is disagreeing that an owner or manager has the right to impose policies that we don't always agree with. And no one is suggesting do something stupid and get fired.

Providing the manager information that the premise that her decision is based on, is flawed, is a different story. And I don't see that as "unprofessional" and "entitled" as you do.

 

[wv2win]

FDA has regulated it, unregulated uses of a product produce a major liability. I'm sure the ethical part of it isn't the reason, but the actual vapor and complaints. I'm not sure it's lying ,but I do think they pick and choose at their leisure, based on the disturbance it causes.

I am not in any way suggesting the OP do anything that would jejeopardize their employment. Providing the manager and co-workers with information that vaping is not harmful to others is my suggestion so that misinformation about vaping does not become the prevaling perception. Beyond that, the OP just needs to follow the rules.

And whether a product is regulated by the FDA means nothing if it is causing harm to others.

 

[jerzi]

I am not in any way suggesting the OP do anything that would jejeopardize their employment. Providing the manager and co-workers with information that vaping is not harmful to others is my suggestion so that misinformation about vaping does not become the prevaling perception. Beyond that, the OP just needs to follow the rules.

Yes, I agree. This is why misinformation hurts the ecig community more than anything. I don't think they should group you with analog smokers though, as to date analogs have been proven to be more dangerous health wise, but if electronic vapor devices / ejuice retain the classification as an unregulated tobacco product, that's where you will end up. Until the classification is changed, there is really nothing that can be done.

 

[wv2win]

Yes, I agree. This is why misinformation hurts the ecig community more than anything. I don't think they should group you with analog smokers though, as to date analogs have been proven to be more dangerous health wise, but if electronic vapor devices / ejuice retain the classification as an unregulated tobacco product, that's where you will end up. Until the classification is changed, there is really nothing that can be done.

The classification was a "compromise" to keep the FDA from banning vaping nationwide for 10 - 20 years. But there is much that can be done. Educate, educate educate. And fight against ignorant misinformation everywhere. Vape openly almost everywhere BUT respectfully. (this does not mean ignore company policies)

But most importantly, all of us join and support CASAA.

 

[stormwench]

But nicotine is not harmful...is it??

If you were a smoker and now vape nicotine was the least of your worries. The other contents of the analog, all 4000 known and unknown chemicals that are known to have certain effects and others not well studied yet, as well as 60 'known' carcinogens and tar that your rid of make nicotine look like fruit juice.

But nicotine does have its down side. It is known to cause high blood pressure especially if one has a propensity to elevated BP issues. It also increase your stroke risk. Relative to everything in an analog nicotine is tame, and since vapors were already inhaling nicotine its not like they were not exposed already.

No nicotine is not harmless and is not the same as water as some preach here even if its delivered in a water vapor but it does have health risks all by itself.

Nicotine is a poison. Its used as an insecticide (granted the bugs get a less pure form but its mean to kill them not protect them from particulate matter in the mic). It does not take much to kill a small child or a pet and we are warmed to not swallow it if on lips, in mouth on hands etc for good reason, it is toxic and can be harmful. Its also very addictive.

Its not a carcinogen and it does not do many of the other 'bad' heath things that the rest of an analog did so for the analog smoker to get rid of all that - even while keeping the nicotine - well for the smoker that a big change that seems to almost make nicotine sound 'harmless'

Nicotine has very real risks to the non smoker if they start using it - which is a good reason in my opinion not to be introducing a non smoker to vaping expecting them to take it up. And while, for the smoker, what tiny other things might be in e-juice and the effect of all the things that make up certain ingredients (like what type of flavors and what's in them). Again, a world apart form the dangers of analog consumption for the analog smoker but there could be some unknown risks with vaping we don't know yet. To me, even if they find out some solvents used in leaching natural flavors nag out and stay with the e-juice, its still only one more thing added to a very few instead of the huge number of things in analogs.

 

[stevegmu]

Two years ago, my work became a tobacco-free zone- no smoking on the property at all, not in our cars, or even within site of the building. Those who want to smoke on break have to leave the property. At the time, I was vaping BLU in an effort to cut back on cigarettes, and asked if those were allowed. Management used the second have vapor excuse- even though I said I would just vape in my car with the windows up while on break. They then said it simulates smoking, or someone from a distance might think I am smoking in my car, so it wasn't allowed. Now that I have quit smoking and have turned on a supervisor to vaping, he's going to try to get tome more clarification from corporate concerning vaping in personal vehicles on the property. I won't hold my breath, though, as decisions from corporate can take years. Maybe in a couple years after more studies have been conducted and vaping becomes more mainstream, things will change. As it is now, I don't vape anywhere smoking is not allowed.

 

[mdeeza]

Easy, say its 0 nic juice.

 

[Vault]

Easy, say its 0 nic juice.

Been there, said that, got flamed On the basis of military drug testing.
Post#50

 

[Talyon]

I can agree that any business owner has the right to make policies for employment and activity on their premises, regardless if those policies are based on ignorance or not. But you stated you "agreed with her decision" which logically must endorse the premise the decision was based on, i.e., vaping is dangerours to others. If we follow your "thinking" to it's logical conclusion, then vaping must be viewed as being dangerous and kept as far away from others as possible. Thus, there is no need to provide factual evidence that vaping is not dangerous to others because the article which supports the manager's decision stated that vaping can be dangerous to others.

We should all just shup-up, stay in smoking sections and/or keep vaping hidden where it belongs and hope no one finds out what we do.

I should head over to the CASAA web site and stop my support. What a waste of time and money that has been.

Wow to over thought mate. So is this the way things are going that we fight for our rights against each other? Please feel free to twist my words to your way of thinking its ok. Time to say goodbye, u don't even know me. Bye......