Productivity losses in smoking breaks on construction sites: A case study

Yung, P and Agyekum-Mensah, G (2012) Productivity losses in smoking breaks on construction sites: A case study. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 19(6), pp. 636-646. ISSN 0969-9988

Abstract

Purpose - This paper aims to examine the extent of productivity losses in smoking breaks on construction sites. Design/methodology/approach - The smoking behaviours of workers in a small/medium-sized construction company were examined for a period of four months. Construction workers were targeted due to their higher prevalence in smoking. The exact time losses through smoking breaks were measured and calculated. The productivity losses were then evaluated and compared with the estimates of productivity losses and wage penalties found in the literature. Findings - It is found that a smoker on average smokes 5.6 cigarettes, which takes a total of 73 minutes, representing 15.2 per cent of productivity loss in an eight-hour shift. This productivity loss is much higher than productivity losses through increased sick leaves or the wage penalties for smokers found in the literature. Research limitations/implications - Variations of smoking behaviours throughout the year have not been considered. The study has focused on a renovation and rehabilitation project, it has not considered the workers from other trades who might have different smoking behaviours. Originality/value - This paper is a contribution to the limited literature on the productive time losses through smoking breaks. Most studies on productive time loss attributable to smoking focused on the additional sick leaves taken by the smokers, without realizing that productive time losses through smoking breaks far exceeds those additional sick leaves.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: construction; construction industry; employees productivity; productivity loss; smoking
Index terms: construction industry, estimate, construction worker, air quality, renovation, productivity, case study, rehabilitation project, methodology, variation, construction company, construction site, penalty
Subjects: financial and cost management, work location, practitioner, organization, air quality, data collection methods, regulatory law, industry analysis, health conditions and diseases, contractual condition, research methods, management, renovation and retrofit
Topics: Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Business Strategy, Cost Management, Health and Safety, Sustainability, Roles and Professions, Legal Issues, Site Management, Contract Administration
Descriptive scope: 4 PCTE

N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here