Inevitably, the expectation exists to engage in
conversations and attempts to bring the group Human Rights claim and my Nuisance
claim to closure, what with the hearing date set for Oct 1.
With two of us receiving BC Housing’s private market rent
supplement (PMRS) – one of us on the Human Rights Claim, and another not on any
claim – any settlement needs to consider helping the one left behind get out.
In this case, the one left behind happens to be the person
who first came to my door entreating me on more than one occasion, to find more
about the pamphlet she had on smoke-free housing.
I felt reticent to spend more time at the computer in a
smoke filled suite, and embarrassed for telling her I didn’t want to do it. I was still mobile, painfully so, but still
mobile enough to get out of my suite to get away from the habitual times that
smokers congregated. However painful
that was, leaving the apartment for the park and fresh air remained absolute in
the circumstance we lived in. She was
not as mobile. I spent my time in my suite on the computer looking for a place
to move, which was turning into a never-ending story.
So eventually, I accepted her entreaties and her $40 to
purchase ink, from her limited income of about $500, so she could have copies of
the documents we found. We found a plethora of secondhand smoke and smoke-free
housing documents, emailing four on to management, asking to be part of a
committee working on smoke-free housing. Ah, the days when we were allowed to
email.
This was before the crisis at the end of March 2008 when
more crying women knocked on my door,
and which proved to be the catalyst for a group report on the scope of the
secondhand smoke problem three weeks later.
Having a computer, my typing skills, once more, were in
demand.
As I wrote previously, BC Housing gave us PMRS applications
which were filled out, and BC Housing granted us the PMRS in 2008, but did not
issue the subsidy, stating that we were on a waiting list.
Two of us receiving the BC Housing PMRS, and moving out on
the same day, resulted in water-cooler talk around, how did that happen? Was it for health reasons? Was it because we were the proverbial “squeaky
wheel?” It's a mystery, and the files are X-files.
In the colloquial understanding of how this came about,
there exists consensus about how this came about, and the underlying script
reads like this.
“My best guess is, because, you know, you wrote them, called
them, so frequently, that essentially every communication from you gets
elevated directly to their legal department, until to the point where they,
just like, give this woman what she
wants and then we can, all of us, get on with our job. That’s my guess what
happened.”
That’s the squeaky wheel explanation. Being sick, strained, and in distress from
coping with secondhand smoke from tobacco and marijuana receives less
credibility as an explanation, than the squeaky wheel reason.
Apparently, the two of us who received the PMRS, well, that’s a great thing we did for ourselves. It’s
an incredible thing we did. We completely empowered ourselves to have done that.
It’s incredible.
So, I’m incredible by being vexatious. The two of us are
incredible for being vexatious. We’re
incredibly vexatious. Not quite the same as incredibly vivacious.
Facts don’t matter. Apparently you must be incredible at
empowering yourself and vexatious too, to get away from secondhand tobacco and
marijuana smoke, and to get a PMRS.
And so now we must continue to be incredible and vexatious,
incredibly vexatious to support the woman left behind, who must also rise to the
standard of incredible and vexatious. Her health vulnerability just doesn’t
factor in.
Invariably, the ‘grandfathering’ word receives air
time. “But is he grandfathered.” “Yah, he’s grandfathered.” Apparently the fact remains that property
managers cannot discriminate against smokers and non-smokers. Non-smokers just have to accommodate smokers’
addictions. Just take a commercial break
when smoke comes your way. Go take a
stroll in the park.
The underlying theme, the underlying scripts, spoken or
implied remains,
“That’s the way we do things around here.” “You don’t know how things are done around
here.” “You don’t know the law.”
Being a bit testy on this grandfathering concept, I say the
person’s name twice, and reiterate one more time, surprising myself at how
quietly I stated:
“Grandfathering is not
a license to smoke. It is mitigated by health, safety, and quiet enjoyment. It is
not a concept in and of itself, that is an umbrella that denies everything else. It just doesn’t. There would be no need for nuisance
laws, quiet enjoyment, or human rights if it was just contract law that was in
place. You wouldn’t be doing this. We
wouldn’t be doing this.”
I managed to silence the conversation.
Now I add to my rant: secondhand smoke is no different than smells from pig farms, mushrooms farms, garbage, idling cars, and mold.
Many of the other claims that existed came about as a result
of one smoker; In the McDaniels case, a few smokers. We have substantially more smokers with a
count in 2008 numbering 39, and currently around 55. Fifty-five smokers lighting up minimum one
pack of cigarettes a day (20). A few
smokers admit to being 2-3 pack-a-day smokers. What does that multiply to? Is that exposure
to secondhand smoke substantial enough? If the problem can’t be fixed, get us
out of here, into the market where there is no-smoking in suites and no smoking
on the property available, and let us get on with our lives.
We all become shaped by the time we live in and the
circumstances we live under. We become
what is required. Others identify us in terms
of what is necessary to live in that time, space, and place. I have been identified, we have been
identified, as incredible, empowering ourselves, and vexatious. These are the skills, knowledge, and attitude
required to successfully accomplish being smoke-free. Being made sick, and
medical documentation just doesn’t cut it.
Funny, we feel exhausted, close to shut down, signing off
the claims, walking away, demoralized, because we all are not as powerful as management, the
insurance company, and the lawyers, and they are more powerful than the
dismissal decision.
No comments:
Post a Comment