The Effects Of Smoking Ban On Employees And Passive Smokers At Work Place And Home

Smoking is an activity that has been around for many years for people to use and adapt into their lifestyle. It is a tool that many people use to help reduce the stresses of life and put them in a comfortable position that enables them to cope with the hectic lifestyle they are living. However, smoking has been scientifically proven to cause many types of cancer, the most common being lung cancer resulting in numerous deaths across the United States. According to BBC, "Smoking is a greater cause of death and disability than any single disease" (BBC, 2). Evidently, the benefits and drawbacks of smoking have been debated for many years, and only recently have some countries have placed a ban in public places such as Britain and the United

The Company’s pledge to provide a safe and healthy work environment bans smoking on Company properties, including but not limited to break areas, bathrooms, and work areas. Employees who smoke will be able to do so only on break and lunch times. They will have to go outside of the Company’s facility in the designated smoking areas on the property.

Though previously smoking was conventional in workplaces, times has revolutionized; people became progressively conscious of the negative influence of smoking on health. The employees who had never smoked became outspoken regarding the stench of smoke and the prospective negative effects of second-hand smoke on their well-being. (Heathfield, S., 2016)

Smokers face many challenges in the modern world, and one of the biggest happens in the workplace. Many large – and small – employers have taken a strict zero-tolerance approach to smoking in the workplace, and that can literally leave smokers with no place to

Specifically, implementation of rules is on the overall safety of each and every person within the workplace. Unfortunately, there will be people who feel triumphant and those who feel discriminated against and defeated. The manufacturers, distributors, and retailers who sell tobacco and now the e-cigarette that creates a vapor for the customer, feel defeated as they and the customers continue to receive push-back from those who do not smoke. Allowing the use of e-cigarettes in the workplace creates a double edge knife for the employer. In defense of the e-cigarette user production will not diminish, and the person will be more enjoyable to be around, since they are able to receive their nicotine addiction. On the other hand, for the worker who does not smoke, while there is still evidence Trtchounian, Williams & Talbot (2010) the vapors released from the e-cigarette and the smoke exhaled by the smoker, possess a health risk to others purely on the chemicals used within the e-cigarette. Moreover, further findings indicate the non-cancer exposure of nicotine and propylene glycol still exceed the minimum of 1.0 parts, which creates a health risk for anyone who inhales the smoke exhaled from another person (Offermann, Francis (Bud), 2014). Any time a person’s actions in the workplace can possibly bring pain and

One major issue of the Smoking In Public Ban is how will the economy react. Some people avoid businesses that allow people to smoke there because they don’t want to endanger themselves, their family, or both. Another pro for the ban in sense of the economy would be the odor of the cigarettes would be gone (Rutherford np).The ban will make businesses more family friendly which will add more money to the economy and cause more jobs be added to the workforce, internal improvements, and many other things that will strengthen our nation. The cons of the smoking in public in terms of the economy would be that it would encourage smokers to smoke less, which is good for the smokers but not so much for the economy because the tobacco industry would

According to CDC (2011) smoking is not only the leading cause of preventable deaths, smoking aggravates the seriousness of other pathologies, creating health complications that need additional medical care, and requiring additional expense on the part of individuals and the taxpayers that support State and Federal health systems. Chronic illnesses, especially those that can lead to morbidity, the hours that employee can work and be productive. Therefore, there are additional costs to individuals and to the greater society. These additional costs and reductions in productivity can be avoided if States reinvest in smoking cessation campaigns at levels equal to or higher than in the 21st century. According to CDC (2011) and Werner (2008) smoking not only costs money, it takes off ten to fourteen years from the normal life expectancy of the smoker and those that are exposed to second hand smoke regularly.

Smoking should be banned in and out of the workplace, firstly because it is a recommended agreement by the management and all staff employed have signed an agreement, as this will impact on all workers and will be better for everyone's health and well being.

Smoking is established as a recognized cause of cancer, lung disease, coronary heart disease, and stroke(US Public Health Service,1964,Doll R 1976,1994, US Department of Health and Human Services,1989).it is considered to be the single most important avoidable cause of premature morbidity and mortality in the world. WHO has estimated that there are about 1100 million smokers worldwide; this represents about one-third of the global population aged over 15 years (WHO,1997). About 73% of these smokers (700 million males, 100 million females) are in developing countries; in industrialized countries there are 200 million male smokers and 100 million female smokers. In the over 15-year-old population of developing countries, it is estimated that about 48% of males and 7% of females are smokers. The corresponding figures for industrialized countries are 42% for males and 24% for females (WHO,1997).

Rewarding people who make the effort to be smoke free and also rewarding other employees who help with this process would mean a better, healthier and more productive workplace for everyone. I would suggest giving every employee a day off on their birthday. In conclusion I am against smoking in the workplace but see a need for non smokers to help smokers kick provide any sort of assistance required to make a happy workplace. Smokers do need to be made aware of the effect the smoking has on others and and the enviroment, and that they are valued in the work place and society only then will any changes take

Health is one of the main reasons for a ban on smoking. Exposure to tobacco smoke greatly increases ones risk of lung cancer and heart disease. Smoking not only effects the smoker but also all those who are around them. While at work one cannot help but

Smoking should be banned in the workplace. It's a bad look for the company and It influences unhealthy social behaviours in the employees. Smoking is detrimental to our health; It's unhealthy, it causes cancer and unsurprisingly has killed over 14,900 Australians in 2004-05. Although there has been a decrease of smokers in Australia since then, we must focus on the effects it still has in our workplace environments.

According to Levy and Friend, (2002), “Population‐based studies have generally found that firms with strong smoking restrictions reported a 10–15% reduction in quantity consumed and 15–20% decrease in smoking prevalence relative to businesses with minimal or no restrictions”(Levy and Friend, 2002). Many studies stated increased cessation rates at worksites that applied total smoking ban policy. As shown in a study by Emont et al. (1992), states that have

Smoking bans have a high pro on our community. They help protect the health of people, smoking bans ensure that smoking in public place will prevent non-smokers to come in contact with second-hand smoke. They help lower healthcare cost, they reduce chances of becoming ill or ending up in the hospital. It helps people save money because of how

The ban will also have an effect on the customers, as now everyday smokers would have to go through the struggle of finding a designated smoking area to smoke even a single cigarette. This will affect his or her smoking habits in one of the two ways; the first possible outcome could be him or her struggling to find a place to smoke every time, which can decrease the frequency of smoking. This, in fact will affect the amount of money they spend on cigarettes. Which in fact, could also have a positive impact on people with families and children. The second possible outcome could be; that since a person cannot smoke in public places, he or she might go home and smoke all their cigarettes, thus affecting their family and children in a negative way. All things considered, smoking indoors and outdoors affects someone in a negative way, which puts another’s life in danger. Cigarette-manufacturing companies will most likely be