|
|
|
|
|
| Canada ban on Perfumes
Posted: 3/10/2007 11:13:33 PM | | That'd be the day anyone dictates to me whether I can wear perfume or not. Where I work there is a ban on 'scents'. . . but not too many people follow it. . . you have to find out who the perfume haters are and then stay away from them. Personally, I find it like aromotherapy when I smell perfume....I've gone along with the no smoking rules, now we have the perfume police? It's not about whether these people are endangering their lives having to smell ...uh..perfume...they just want a cause that doesn't entail too much effort or gray matter on their part. | |
|
| |
| Canada ban on Perfumes
Posted: 3/11/2007 12:53:18 PM | Personally, I think this is non-scents.
I am allergic to feathers, should we ban down clothing everywhere?
Where does it stop? | |
|
| Canada ban on Perfumes
Posted: 3/11/2007 1:02:35 PM | That's just it, it will never stop...it's gotten to the point where we're all going to have to walk around in bubbles.... ya know like michael jackson, but without the celebrity... | |
|
| Canada ban on Perfumes
Posted: 3/27/2007 12:04:55 AM | Wouldn't the answer to smoking bans and perfume bans be better ventilation instead of sealed buildings?
Michelle | |
|
| Canada ban on Perfumes
Posted: 3/27/2007 12:21:41 AM | Speaking as someone with allergies, I'm glad the government is finally taking steps to stop people from harassing everyone around them with odours that can make them sick. My manager is even worse -- just the smell of the cleansers we use around the shop make give her serious headaches, and perfumes leave her so sick that she can't work.
I see it like this:
You don't want me to endanger your health by smoking in the office, right? Then don't set off my allergies by forcing me to smell your perfume. You don't have the right to make me sick just because you're shallow and vain, anymore than I have the right to make you sick by smoking (hypothetically that is, since I don't smoke anyway). | |
|
| Canada ban on Perfumes
Posted: 3/27/2007 12:46:46 AM | silver surfer (loose boots?), having read this thread a bit ago and having posted already that i would prefer the investigation into and regulation of toxic chemicals in perfume so as to address the specifics, versus eliminate all scents, i have nonetheless been thinking about the proposed policy. like yourself, i also wonder if people understood the "suffering", if they would be a bit kinder in what they applied to their own bodies, knowing the reaction in others (apparently an increasing number of "others").
i have lyme disease and my reaction is not respiratory. i actually love the "smell" of many perfumes and before my diagnosis, i had even taken a course in aromatherapy as relates to massage therapy. for me, as with certain glues and ammonia, the smell of certain perfumes creates a neurological reaction. i feel like someone poured acid on my skin. it burns all over and i feel very weak. i actually would like to curl up and cry! i wish i could understand exactly "WHAT" in perfumes can create such a horrific pain.
i had someone working for me who, for the second time, walked into my house SWATHED in this cheap smelling and for me, burning, perfume. when i "again" told her it was making me sick, she laughed and said OH SERENITY (well actually my real name) as if i was some sort of idiot. i was beginning to burn but it was clear this was uncomfortable for her, so as usual, i had to put myself aside and EDUCATE. the woman was also denying wearing any perfume or perfumed deodorant.
i then explained to her in great detail what it "felt" like verus smelled like. i think she got it and then explained that it was her body lotion and she would "try" to remember not to wear it in my home. still, she did not show any sign of sympathy but more of rolling her eyes but wanting to still work here.
i'm a pretty sensitive person. if i knew someone felt like a lighter was applied to their skin, i would do my best to lessen my role in their pain. it's not an unreasonable request. i do my best for the environment and i pay taxes which goes to the health care delivery towards other people's medical issues. alcohol and smoking and car accidents from drunken driving are some of the major costs of hospitalization. but i don't go around and whine about contributing to those funds. so i guess if find it kind of sad , that others don't care similarly about me. i am really not sure if people understood, if most would even care.
so, i am impressed that a city would go to such an extent. i have not heard of this as public policy in the usa, although many physician offices who specialize in lymes and other immune disorders will post a sign requesting that no perfumes enter the waiting rooms.
although i am not sure this policy will pass nor if it "should" pass (given the precedents as relates to other issues) , what i would appreciate is more education on the matter. and not just as regards the respiratory aspects, but also the neurological ramifications and how awful this is for children who also experience this excruciating and burning pain. it feels almost as if the ammonia was applied directly to my skin! is there ammonia in perfume or something chemically related? | |
|
| Canada ban on Perfumes
Posted: 3/27/2007 1:21:59 AM | Serenity
I don't want to seem mean or insensitive but I wonder how far society should go in accomadating people who are sensitive to their surroundings. Your particular irritant is perfumes, someone else its smoke, someone else is allergic to peanuts, someone else is allergic to eggs, someone else its fluorescent lighting, someone else its fabics and on and on and on.
Are we all to be "prisoners' to the needs of others?
And while I certainly do NOT wish to imply that your symptoms are exaggerated (and let me be very clear - I don't know you and cannot possibly make such a judgement), studies have shown that many many people who believe they have environmental sensitivities actually show no reaction when subjected to the chemicals without the odour. Their malady is actually neurotic in origin. (please remember that neurotic does not imply that they don't feel the discomfort - they do!)
With so many politically correct lobby groups enforcing these neurotic notions, its getting worse and worse.
I have actually read stories of people claiming that they bled from their ears in an airport because someone opened the door to the smoking room while they were in the vicinity!
At what point does this stop! Those of us with no allergies or health problems are being subjected to the same rules that you must follow to avoid getting sick. In short, I have to act like I am the one who is allergic to be sensitive to your disease?
Would better ventilation not be the better answer? ARe you aware that there are now air cleaners on the market that will remove 92 % of all particles less than 0.1 micron in size and some will even provide sorbants to absorb gases and disinfect the air with ultraviolet light at the same time?
The cost of such an air cleaner is about $800.00 - surely such a device in your office would relieve your discomfort without imposing the restrictions of your disorder on others?
Why should the rest of us have to alter our lives in order to help you deal with your disease?
I sometimes wonder if I will be asked to stop walking and use a wheelchair in order to show sympathy for those who are paralyzed! does everyplace have to be suitable for little emily asthmatic or can there still be a place or two for healthy adults to enjoy?
Michelle | |
|
| Canada ban on Perfumes
Posted: 3/27/2007 2:24:06 AM | michelle (suzanne 10),
if you bothered to read my first post, you will find that i did not ask for your sympathy. i was a teaching hospital executive (vice president), a national health care consultant, and yes i have an allergy system in my home. the person who wore perfume came into my home, not office.
i cannot speak for your health care delivery system, but in your profile you explain that you are overweight and smoke. in the usa, much of our tax dollars go to health care delivery. a large percentage of hospitalizations are related to your two "preferences", as well as to those who consume excessive alcohol. i have had sympathy for the addictions and compulsions of others and i've had to pay for their medical care with my tax dollars!!!
my "disability" came from a tick bite, not personal behavior. most of my coverage is experimental and not covered by insurance (paid for by others). so, keeping with the tone of your own post targetting my post to another person on this thread: why should i have to pay your hospital bills, using "your" logic??? and if you think your health care delivery is free, i might add that my old firm was called in to help your country with it's increasingly excessive health care costs quite some time ago. as in england you are slowly developing a two tier system so that the rich can purchase extra health care insurance beyond what your tax system can cover for all of your country's constituencies.
as to your being asked to sit in a wheel chair "suitable for little emily asthmatic" (?!*, duh) , time will no doubt reveal your personal destiny. so remember your words: the future "little michelle lung cancer".
thank you for proving my point.
namaste, serenity cw
ps for the education of others, her recommended ultraviolet light works best with HVAC (includes air conditioning). the "allergens" will not otherwise be captured long enough to be addressed only by a heating system. ultraviolet also works well with a drinking water filter system. perhaps, michelle, you can design one to filter your cigarretes as a preventive measure. | |
|
| Canada ban on Perfumes
Posted: 3/27/2007 4:55:16 AM | Gosh Serenity
I couldn't agree more! I don't want to pay for your health care either! Currently I pay about $20,000/year on the health care of others!
Really Serenity - what kind of victim are you? Letting someone in your HOME with perfume on. Try saying no!
PS - cigarette smoke is sterile
Michelle | |
|
chinua
|
Joined: 9/30/2005
Msg: 61 | |
| Canada ban on Perfumes
Posted: 3/27/2007 8:28:57 AM | ^^^^very rude person..........which I consider all smokers. I'm on medication because of people like you- I can't 'just say no' when someone lights up in the yard(lumber) outside the back gate where I work. Thats staff ( who get extra breaks just to smoke) and customers- even when they're not smoking; I still have to put up with smell that lingers.
Serenity didn't have a choice in her medical condition; you do. People like you remind me of when my mom hurt her back lifting overweight people in the extended care unit at the hospital; and when she had to make sure the people who were on oxygen weren't smoking, and blow the place up!
You don't want to pay for other people's health care?? quit being a hypocrite!! | |
|
| Canada ban on Perfumes
Posted: 3/27/2007 8:44:06 AM | | This has been common office policy for sometime now. I understand that some people have allergies and some perfumes are just offensive; however, if they can smell my perfume, then they are standing waaaaay to close! | |
|
| Canada ban on Perfumes
Posted: 3/27/2007 9:44:40 AM | Wow Chinua - I may be rude but you are petty, small and ignorant
You actually believe that smokers - standing outside - not even on the property where you work - are something you can be complaining about? Just exactly how long does the smell of cigarettes linger outside? This is exactly the point I was making. In order to satisfy your stated health concerns - I must not only stand outside but stand outside only where you consent for me to stand. Why don't you just take your break on the other side of the building if you are so sensitive?
Talk about a control freak!
And Chinua - there is no disease or disorder on this earth that can be conclusively identified as being caused by tobacco smoke. Smokers and Never-smokers get exactly the same diseases. No diagonostian can examine or biopsy you and say - yup this lung cancer, asthma, emphesema, heart disease etc etc was conclusively caused by smoking or exposure to second hand smoke.
Chinua - your mother hurt was at least partially responsible for her back injury because she failed to observe standard health and safety protocols or failed to refuse work she felt was unsafe. I used to be a register nurse as well and lifted heavy people many many many times without injury.
Yes I totally believe that it is time to dismantle the nationalized health care. Such health care is a social contract that says I will pay X dollars for health care that will be used for all, in hopes that when I get sick, I will get health care myself.
That social contract has now been broken with people like yourself and Serenity supporting the refusal of health care to smokers. I can no longer rely on the system to be there when I need it, so why on earth would I want to support it?
In Canada, smokers pay over 10 billion dollars in "extra" taxes for their health care. that is in addition to health care premiums and taxes. I believe that with $20,000 per year over the course of my lifetime, I can afford my own health care - pay direct - no insurance.
If you can't - well that is your problem! You can always consider taxing or denying health care to those people who get injured playing sports (self inflicted injuries), the people who indulge in extreme activities like skiing, taxing those who burden health care by having more than 2 kids, those who get a sexual disease by being irresponsible, drinkers (oh, we pretty much including everybody here aren't we)
Why should those of us who believe that life is about living and not about seeing who can deliver the most well-preserved corpse to the undertaker support the privileged few who are considered by the public health elite to be the "deserving sick".
BTW - Serenity - why is ok for you to express your "feelings" and opinions but not me? Could it be because you secretly hate smokers to the point where you believe that smokers are some species of subhumanity? And you work in the health care field? And you have the nerve to ask me to "understand" your feelings but when I express mine, you completely disregard and disrespect me?
And Serenity - I hate to break it to you girl but statistically, I have 11 times (that is 1100 %) more risk of dying of the flu virus than of a smoking - related disease.
Do people ever take responsibility for themselves anymore? Serenity - the air cleaning equipment that is connected to an HVAC system only has about half the efficiency of a proper room air conditioner. I was trying to help you but I guess you believe that its better for the whole world to accommodate you than for you to at least try to help yourself!
You have an employee, who was warned not to wear perfumes, who disobeyed this request and invaded your private home? And when confronted, she rolled her eyes at you? What a victim you are but wait, why don't you fire her ass or at least refuse her the right to enter your home when she is wearing perfume? No - much much better to whine and complain about the inconsideration and rudeness of others that causes you to be a "victim".
Michelle | |
|
| Canada ban on Perfumes
Posted: 3/27/2007 2:45:47 PM | Whats good for the goose....just another dumb move in a PC world. I used to keep my smoking urge on flights by doubling up on peanuts, no more. Someone might be allergic. I get airsick from time to time, sooo can we just eliminate air travel? and nobody should have to suffer at work or a restuarant when someone dumps the bottle of some obnoxious perfume, anymore than the person objecting to a smoker. It is all dumb, but again...give them an inch .... | |
|
| Canada ban on Perfumes
Posted: 3/27/2007 3:21:53 PM | calling planet suzanne/michelle!
do you have a rage disorder? can you read?
i DO support medical care for cigarette smokers and for people with weight related issues. and believe me, you will need other income from the pool to support your eventual "medical" journey. if it's not one thing, it's another. that's part of the human condition and learning from living. i paid taxes for other people's children to go to school, way before i adopted my teens in my fifites. i've contributed to other people's social welfare, a system which might not be in place for my future. am i "pissed off" about living in "society"? no, i am not. but "seems" like you are. i have many things in my life for which to be grateful. how i handle/treat my employees is not your problem. i doubt you are a human resources director. best take care of your own issues first.
i have already stated that i currently believe this is not a topic for legislation at this point in society's development. sometimes the rulers are worse than those who they are ruling. it could set precedents as it's too "iffy" and there are other more massive priorities which affect more people such as poverty, education, etc.
i do, however, appreciate those who understand the plight of people who are immune compromised and i do know that many do not. they think people are reacting "just" to a "smell". i believe in educating and taking the risk to do that, such as dealing with an occasional person such as yourself.
i do believe in the identification of toxic chemicals and labeling as others have also mentioned on this thread. however, i believe the scent is innocent until proven guilty!! the question is, who already knows or will prove exactly what is toxic in certain scents? certainly not the perfume or personal products industry!
i know when i was in my executive "prime", i really did think and believe that anyone could "fix" anything that befell them. i believed that people could "will" things away and was quite fiesty battling for things i believed in. furthermore, for most of my efforts the results proved true. however, it's one thing to fight one's internal demons such as what appears to me to be your current journey miss michelle-- quite another to deal with toxins and parasites, etc. even many "holistic" practitioners are beginning to see the need to address and incorporate scientific findings into natural healing methods, etc. the potential complementarity of western and eastern medicine holds much promise. however, the complete solution (let alone the question) has not "yet" been discovered with respect to perfumes.
invaded? confronted? victim? <img src=http://www.plentyoffish.com/smiles/icon_201.gif border=0> paradigm shift in order? <img src=http://www.plentyoffish.com/smiles/icon_201.gif border=0>
hello???? no more said. no more time for toxic people, let alone toxic perfume! irrelevant to this thread. we need opinions ( to get a handle on perceptions and priorities) , not personal attacks.
information about toxicity would be helpful if anyone with a "real" background and expertise could provide more "knowledge" and less "hot air".
for some, if not their smoking or tick bites or chemical sensitivities, simple RAGE will destroy them.  a sad encumberment for one on a "relationships" journey. | |
|
| Canada ban on Perfumes
Posted: 3/27/2007 3:39:46 PM | the canoodians are commies with a national socilist bent. I see them here in washington state here for thier medical treatment they cant get at home. they are so smart! they have a stranding army of one. they grow good pot. they are cowards and fools i may invade canoodia soon and take over. pot to the peapoles free everything    | |
|
| Canada ban on Perfumes
Posted: 3/27/2007 3:53:27 PM | michelle, i forgot to add that you and i do agree that office buildings need clean air solutions (i think govt. buildings where you work and hospitals where i consulted are top priorities). just how that ties into irrational attacks on children in wheelchairs and immune compromised people is where i have taken offense.
you work for the govt. and are a regulator but you don't want some things regulated. this gets into a whole other thread. where do you draw the line about regulation? you believe in civil rights-- something i have fought for since i can remember to speak and my particular interest as a health care provider.
clearly in social policy the rights of ALL must be weighed and i often try to find win- win situations. if your building is not properly ventilated then perhaps channel your anger into a class action suit against your employers. if my memory serves me, there have been some similar legal actions taken, although i am told the environmental agencies are extremely political and it takes a long time. nonetheless that would be a "non-victim" approach, not to mention a win-win situation.
oh well, enough said. | |
|
| Canada ban on Perfumes
Posted: 3/27/2007 3:55:58 PM | Dear God People, stop trying to rule every one's behavior. Just how many bans do you people want enacted. Bad language hurts my ears hurt. Can we please have a ban on profanity too ?
Did anyone every hear of just getting up and walking away from something that bothers you ? Perfume bothers me too, but I'm not going to try to take away someones right to wear it.
I have a newsflash for people, just because you have an opinion on something, like when people should or shouldn't wear perfume, or eat Twinkies, or exercise, or anything else you disaprove of or bothers you, it doesnt mean everyone should have to live their lives to suit your needs or your idea how the world should turn.
I've heard this is called the "me generation" and I sure can see why.
I have to agree with the above poster, to many control freaks or maybe just self centered people, who want the government to make rules to suit them, no matter the rights of other people. | |
|
| Canada ban on Perfumes
Posted: 3/27/2007 4:09:30 PM | Thank you for clarifying Serenity.
I do have quite a bit of time invested in researching this and other topics. I also have a background in chemistry and toxicology.
The contaminant you are seeking is a volatile organic carbon. The stuff that perfumes evaporate that has the smell. There are literally hundreds and hundreds of thousands of such chemicals that are ubiquitous to the indoor and outdoor environment. Trying to find the one or combination of compounds that do it to you would be nigh on impossible.
However I do understand what you are saying - I react in exactly the same way to even the most minute amounts of nitric acid and no other acid. Unfortunately, I work frequently with nitric.
I don't think you quite understand that trying to protect you from the environment to which you react is an unattainable goal. What might be attainable is to put a barrier between you and the compounds that irritate you.
Please do investigate the suggestion I offered about the room air cleaner - while it is true that there are hundreds of models that do not deliver on what they promise, the technology has progressed by leaps and bounds in recent years.
Working in a hospital - you are, of course familiar with hepa filtration. There are models of chemical adsorption (not carbon filtration) combined with hepa filtration. These models are few and far between. You need to understand that the VOC's that are the most likely source of your irritation are also likely in gasous phase. Filtration will NOT remove them. Chemical adsorption is the only thing that will help. There are currently no models of air cleaners with chemical adsorption that are connected to an HVAC system. The only ones I have every seen were room size cleaners (some of them will efficiently cleans hundreds of square meters though). Many of them large enough to keep a whole floor of an average home surprisingly clean.
There is one particular model that I can suggest you look at. It is called IQAir - you can google the name to get to the website and also look at consumer reports with laboratory test results. I am not affiliated with this company in any way but I am buying a unit myself for my home. I have done extensive research before choosing this particular model to suit my needs. I am buying it because I have a gas stove and understand the level of indoor pollution this cooking method can bring. As well as the 1.6 million cases of lung cancer caused by exposure to cooking fumes. I installed a 300 cubic foot per minute range hood for exactly the purpose of protecting my family and myself from indoor air pollution. There is one particular model that is specifically designed to remove volatile organic carbons by chemical adsorption.
Sure its expensive but well worth it if this condition is making you feel as uncomfortable as you say. The one place we all need to feel comfortable is our own homes!
This company will come to your home to demonstrate the unit and help you set it up so that it functions most effeciently and how to maintain that effeciency.
The other "barrier" method that you might want to try is a silicone based lotion that you can rub on your skin to create an artificial barrier for a short time (like when you want to grocery shop or go out). It feels a little strange but better than feeling like you are on fire! Ask the pharmacist to recommend a brand - don't be surprised if it is commonly used for diaper rashes. Its invisible but does make you skin feel differently.
Do you feel the burning everywhere or is there a particular spot. With me its my lower arms and belly.
Its not a reaction to ammonia, at least not for me! I have worked with household ammonia forever and it doesn't burn like acid but if you want to test your theory - go to the grocery store, open a bottle of ammonia and if you react - there you have it.
Please don't be insulted by anything I have said - I am trying to provide you with information so that your life can be more comfortable and liveable. I have nothing but sympathy for people who suffer from a chronic illness. I am a mother and a former nurse. I can't remember a time in my entire life when I wasn't taking care of someone. Old habits die hard.
However, I also have needs and feelings that I would like to have considered as well. And I will no longer submit to the tyranny of being told "what is good for me" or being coerced into making decisions that others approve of on my behalf.
Michelle | |
|
| Canada ban on Perfumes
Posted: 3/27/2007 4:38:19 PM | Yes I am a regulator - Rules are required in a civil society! But the application of rules that are fair to ALL parties is what is important.
Unfortunately, in my current career and with my former background as a nurse, I have come to understand that there are those who seek to use "health concerns" to control and manipulate others. I have also seen some who would ignore the concerns of others for their own gain or to avoid prosecution.
I am required to carefully evaluate all the evidence and try to interpret the law in such a way as to be fair and reasonable to ALL parties. Often, there is a great deal of negotiation and compromise required to satisfactorily resolve most situations (I resolve about 98 % of my cases through negotiation).
I seek as the highest priority those situations where the health of any person may be compromised.
Bans are not compromises (as you have demonstrated that you understand). Bans are the result when a minority voice seeks to usurp the powers of government and seek to ensure priority use of the resources of society for themselves.
Bans are bad governance. I have never seen one yet that provided consistently fair and equitable results (including drinking and driving laws). Civil laws must always be tempered with judgement and reason.
There are those who are genuinely hypersensitive. Unfortunately, in trying to deal with hypersensitivity, society as a whole must sacrifice its individuality, its culture, its resources. The price is simply too high.
In the current realm of health fears, where everyday brings another announcement of impending doom, disability and death. There is little room for judgement and reason.
As a regulator, I am fustrated beyond belief by the neurosis this has generated. As a human being and a smoker - I will no longer tolerate being treated as a disease.
Michelle | |
|
| Canada ban on Perfumes
Posted: 3/27/2007 5:15:10 PM | I was quite flippant in my post regarding personal space, but my question is actually quite serious--do you two bantering ladies have any comments regarding scents and physical boundaries in the workplace?
Until this moment, I have never put a thought toward the scents in shampoos and conditioners. During recreational activities, I've been close enough to another person to be able to smell their shampoo, but I think that this type of closeness would be considered an invasion of personal space in a normal office environment.
Are shampoos normally considered irritants as well? Would a scent ban apply to hair products? Is there a standard "red-zone" radius for scent emissions (perfumes or otherwise) that's considered?
I would think that if they can't smell it, who cares--but maybe I'm missing something...
NOTE: I definitely have a selective sensitivity to certain scents--if they are overpowering, synthentic-smelling or just plain stinky, I can be very sensitive to them to the point of developing a headache. However, if I find the scent pretty and pleasing, I can whiff it all day long. | |
|
| Canada ban on Perfumes
Posted: 3/27/2007 5:34:15 PM | Some hospitals have this ban already in effect and have for a while. Some people are dangersously allergic. (looks around) The world didn't end. In fact things were so un-different you didn't even know or notice. Is it really worth getting into a fuss over?
And some people REALLY overdo it. Scent has its place, but being stuck in say, an elevator with some eejit who bathed in cheap crap is pretty nasty. | |
|
| Canada ban on Perfumes
Posted: 3/27/2007 5:36:01 PM |
Just regulate the chemicals in perfume?
They're alcohol and essential oils. Expensive ones. | |
|
| Canada ban on Perfumes
Posted: 3/27/2007 6:09:57 PM | I know some people are hyper sensitive to somethings, but the point is you can't regulate everything. Were do you draw the line ? If you have a problem as an individual then as unfortunate as that is it's your problem to deal with not the whole worlds.
If people wearing pink socks set off an allergy in me, should there be a ban on wearing pink socks ? Or is it my responsibility to get to an allergist and see what can be done for my condition ?
As for "scents" causing a problem in the work place, won't a more sensible approach be to politely have a talk with your co workers and explain your problem, or how about going to an allergist, or asking your supervisor for a different work area, instead of a ban on all scents . And what happens when you leave the workplace, say you go shopping, should every customer be banned from wearing a scent ? Maybe we should't be allowed to walk down the street wearing perfume either, someone might bet a wiff of it and be offended ...never mind the stink from all the traffic.
It seems every one wants to be catered to now days, they don't want to have to deal with anything that is unpleasant to them. Ex. someone wearing to much perfume in an elevate. Well maybe you should just suck it up and be uncomfortable for those few minutes it takes for an elevator ride. It's not a perfect world and we are going to run across things in it that annoy us, but that doesn't mean we try to ban everything we can think of that annoys us.
Tolerence for others seems to be an outdated notion. | |
|
chinua
|
Joined: 9/30/2005
Msg: 75 | |
| Canada ban on Perfumes
Posted: 3/27/2007 7:33:02 PM | My mom was a nurse's aide; and is only 5 feet tall; an overweight person who decides to fight; is a lot harder on the person lifting them(even with a partner) than a normal size person. The RN's she worked with didn't lift anybody.
As for work; the parking lot is still on store property!! standing outside the gate doesn't do much good; especially when there is a wind- Hope is pretty windy. There is talk of a bylaw that says no smoking in public!!
Guess who calls in sick more often on our staff?? the smokers! Guess who has to pick up the slack? the non-smokers! It won't matter how much evidence shows up that smoking causes cancer; a lot of people don't believe it.
At least we don't have to put up with perfume very often; from staff or customers. I wish we could have any kind of clean air system; but, its a very old building- the doors are not always closed..........it wouldn't work. | |
|
|
| Page 3 of 12
|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 |
|
Home
login 
