New smoking ban

[craigwatanabe]

Re: New smoking ban

According to the website, it was a small claims case. Thus, no prosecution, just a judge (and maybe jury). And, in small claims, not even any lawyers!

Hmmm...like Judge Judy.

[tutusue]

Re: New smoking ban

According to the website, it was a small claims case. Thus, no prosecution, just a judge (and maybe jury). And, in small claims, not even any lawyers!

I don't know about other states but in Hawaii there is no jury in small claims court. If one wants to pay for a lawyer to appear with or on behalf of a client in SMC then that is allowable. However, it kinda negates the purpose of small claims!!! If the case gets bumped up to personal injury in civil court then, yes, a jury can/will be involved.

[Amati]

Re: New smoking ban

Mahalo Tutu, good thing I'm not in the position of giving legal advice for small claims court.

[TuNnL]

Re: New smoking ban

Funny they banned the cigs from county parks, but no fireworks ban....go figga!

That probably stems from the fact that fireworks are a cultural ritual that happens strictly twice a year, and cigs are a health insurance nightmare that happen randomly, 24/7.

Despite that, I still light up once in awhile.

[douglas]

Re: New smoking ban

Looks like Sarasota County, Florida will be joining a number of other cities and counties that don’t hire smokers. I wonder how long it will take City & County of Honolulu to connect the dots and figure out that they can save a lot of $$$ by doing this.

County: Smokers need not apply
by Zac Anderson
Published Tuesday, May 20, 2008 at 4:30 a.m.

SARASOTA — Citing the burden they place on taxpayers who pay for government workers' health insurance, Sarasota County officials announced Monday that they no longer will hire smokers.
BACKGROUND

In Florida, the right not to hire employees who smoke was upheld in 1995 by the state Supreme Court after a prospective employee sued North Miami.
Sarasota County officials cited Centers for Disease Control research that put the annual cost of hiring a smoker at $3,400 a year in lost productivity and medical expenses.

The policy makes Sarasota County the first county in Southwest Florida to make smoking a hiring issue. Charlotte and Manatee counties do not, though Manatee has policies designed to discourage employees from smoking.
Sarasota County Administrator Jim Ley said the hiring ban came out of "a five- or six-year strategy to produce a healthier work force and manage our long-term health care costs."

The county currently pays about $31 million annually in health benefits for 3,600 employees, or $8,600 per worker.

Ley said not hiring smokers should help limit the annual growth in health care costs, the most expensive perk offered to county employees.

Patrick Reynolds, who runs Foundation for a Smoke Free America, said it is hard to gauge the popularity of such hiring policies.

They are less prevalent than smoking bans in restaurants and public places and largely dependent on state labor laws, he said.

"It's really a question of what extent the state empowers companies to refuse to hire smokers," said Reynolds, who only tracks statewide smoking policies. "We know these bans contribute to the overall goal of a smoke free America."

In Florida, government agencies that refuse to hire smokers range from the sheriff's offices in Hernando, Hillsborough and Pasco Counties to the city of Atlantic Beach.

Manatee County employees who are smokers must pay more for the best health care coverage and attend a class about smoking. The county is also exploring ways to get more people to quit, said Manatee County Administrator Ed Hunzeker.

Charlotte officials have discussed a ban on hiring smokers but the county currently does not discriminate.

"It comes up from time to time, but right now we don't ask that question," said Charlotte communications director Joyce Ross.

According to a report by the National Workrights Institute, a survey conducted in 1988 by the Administrative Management Society found that about 6,000 businesses nationwide "discriminate against off-duty smokers" and "the number has almost certainly increased since then."

Sarasota County Commissioner Nora Patterson said she has some reservations about the tobacco-free employee rule, but decided it was beneficial on balance.

"We could potentially lose some very valuable employees but all things being equal it's probably a good thing," she said.

The move not to hire smokers is the latest in a string of anti-smoking rules initiated by Sarasota County.

The county recently banned smoking on public beaches.

Sarasota County Commissioner Jon Thaxton opposed the beach smoking ban as an assault on personal freedom but supports the hiring criteria.

"I want to give people their opportunity to do what otherwise are lawful activities but this is proactive, not retroactive," he said. "Everyone will know this up front."

New hires will be asked to submit to a drug test that detects nicotine and sign a pledge promising they have not smoked in the last 12 months. Existing employees will not be affected, but they are encouraged to take advantage of free programs to help them quit.

In Florida, the right not to hire employees who smoke was upheld by a 1995 ruling of the state Supreme Court.

A job applicant sued the city of North Miami arguing that an anti-smoker policy violated her privacy.

The city argued that each smoker cost taxpayers $4,611 (in 1981 dollars) annually because of medical bills.

Some companies even extend the smoking prohibition to spouses of prospective employees.

Ley said 15 percent of the county's employees with severe illnesses account for 85 percent of the health care costs.

County officials based their decision not to hire smokers in part on a Centers for Disease Control study that said employees who smoke cost their employer about $3,400 a year in lost productivity and medical expenses.

[Amati]

Re: New smoking ban

There's a front page article in the Honolulu Advertiser about banning smoking in a person's own home and bedroom.

http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/ap...NTPAGECAROUSEL

Anyone have a no smoking rule on the lanai at their condo/time share? We just returned from a week on Maui and the time share was 100% no smoking including the lanai. We booked the time share as an exchange so it was a new place for us. Is this what is being talked about in the article, and catching on?

I personally liked the "clean environment" rule. (But all was not perfect with rules, was unhappy about the having to move our family's second rental car out of the "visitor's parking" stall.)

[AlohaKine]

Re: New smoking ban

Anyone have a no smoking rule on the lanai at their condo/time share? We just returned from a week on Maui and the time share was 100% no smoking including the lanai. We booked the time share as an exchange so it was a new place for us. Is this what is being talked about in the article, and catching on?

I personally liked the "clean environment" rule. (But all was not perfect with rules, was unhappy about the having to move our family's second rental car out of the "visitor's parking" stall.)

I don't know that it is "catching on". I'm sure they lose customers as a result much like some of the hotels that have a complete ban. But, I guess if the owner wants non-smoking it is their private property. I can assure you that I wouldn't stay their and would instead stay at a place where smokers are treated right. Same like the bars, my greens go to the places that let me smoke inside, and people that really want non-smoking go to the other ones.

As for "clean environment", don't view tobacco smoke as pollution anymore then burning some insence.

[Amati]

Re: New smoking ban

As for "clean environment", don't view tobacco smoke as pollution anymore then burning some insence.

That is an interesting perspective. I googled and found this article about incense.

http://www.checnet.org/healthehouse/education/articles-detail.asp?Main_ID=511

Incense is another source of indoor air pollution. When burned, incense sticks release particulate matter into the air. The tiny particles are easily inhaled into the lungs and can irritate airways. Several studies have linked exposure to incense smoke with cancer, asthma and contact dermatitis (skin irritation). One study reported that children whose parents burned incense during pregnancy or while nursing had a higher risk for leukemia. Carbon monoxide and benzene are also released when incense burns, as well as fragrance chemicals like musk compounds, for which there is little toxicity or health data, though they are persistent in the environment.

The burning of candles or incense also releases polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, or PAHs, are released, according to a study reported in the New Scientist. PAHs are common outdoor air pollutants (they also result from gas and diesel fuel burning) that may cause cancer and low birth weight. One Taiwanese study collected air samples from inside a temple where incense is burned regularly and compared them with samples taken outside and from a busy intersection nearby. The PAH levels from the temple were 19 times higher than the outdoor samples, and slightly higher than at the intersection.

I wonder what breathing the equivalent of a pack a day of cigarettes would do to the lungs?

[TuNnL]

Re: New smoking ban

Looks like Sarasota County, Florida will be joining a number of other cities and counties that don’t hire smokers. I wonder how long it will take City & County of Honolulu to connect the dots and figure out that they can save a lot of $$$ by doing this.

The short-term effect would be an inability to terminate incompetent employees in certain segments of city employment. The particular segment I am thinking of has to be comprised of at least 80 percent smokers. And people who would apply for those jobs, probably have similar demographics.

[AlohaKine]

Re: New smoking ban

The short-term effect would be an inability to terminate incompetent employees in certain segments of city employment. The particular segment I am thinking of has to be comprised of at least 80 percent smokers. And people who would apply for those jobs, probably have similar demographics.

I've never seen how these costs were computered or the raw data. Sounds like another anti-smoking lobby sham study to make a point. Where I work, smokers are not sick anymore than non-smokers and it is an older workforce. It is actually the obese employees that have the heart attacks, diabetes, leg problems, miss work all the time. However, there isn't money to be made hating that group.

By the way, I smoke and I have not cost one dime in health problems to my employer for anything even remotely smoking related and take fewer days off than most others where I work.

[AlohaKine]

Re: New smoking ban

The Hawaii Department of Healths own study published in the June 2008 Hawaii Medical Journal found the number of patrons in bars to be down 34%. Wow. They are trying to down play this.

Furthermore they measured air quality in terms of particulate matter less than 2.5 microns ( basically they measure the amount of smoke ). PM 2.5 was found to be at least FIVE times safer than the OSHA limit even on transient data spikes in totally enclosed bars with no ventilation and the doors shut. The OSHA level is 5000 micrograms per cubic meter. The highest average they found was 360.9.

Even the ridiculously low and biased EPA limit of 65 was not exceeded as long as the place had ventilation, left its doors open, or was not fully enclosed. The 65 number was also exceeded on occasion in places with no smoking allowed because it is ridiculously low.

Finally the study refers to the "effects" of environmental tobacco smoke as a "controversy" with "purported" effects.

[tutusue]

Re: New smoking ban

My Makaha condo building recently passed a motion to not allow smoking in/on/within any common areas. IOW, smoke in one's own unit or smoke outside the property lines. It'll be interesting to see how this new rule plays out.

[Walkoff Balk]

Re: New smoking ban

Thank You for Smoking because there's not enough vog in the air.

[AlohaKine]

Re: New smoking ban

My Makaha condo building recently passed a motion to not allow smoking in/on/within any common areas. IOW, smoke in one's own unit or smoke outside the property lines. It'll be interesting to see how this new rule plays out.

My guess is that in the outside areas it will be difficult to enforce. I've found most people are not willing to start a confrontation over outdoor smoking, unless it is blowing directly into their home. Just look at the 20 foot rule. It's a hopelessly unenforceable joke. Unless there is a cop or security guard policing the immediate area, no body cares.

The 20 foot rule gets violated by my best guess, several hundred thousand times a day all over Hawaii. Even if it's only 100,000 a day, that's some 60 million violations since Nov 16th, 2006. Number of fines issued for the 20 foot rule = 0.

[tutusue]

Re: New smoking ban

My guess is that in the outside areas it will be difficult to enforce. I've found most people are not willing to start a confrontation over outdoor smoking, unless it is blowing directly into their home.[...]

The residents are pulling together to form a neighborhood watch...but not for the sole purpose of busting smokers. That's actually a few notches down the list. However, those wanting to be involved in the watch are also the same people who pushed for the new smoking rule. And since this building sits in the middle of Makaha...confrontation isn't an issue!