Blanket Ban on Smoking in Public

[High Fidelity 0]

QUOTE (partychris @ Feb 15 2006, 11:23 AM)

Must be so nice to work in them

Unless you're a smoker. http://www.dj-forum.co.uk/html//emoticons/rolleyes.gif

[ChrisPointon 0]

I've just watched the lunchtime news, and most of the program was dominated by this law. It didn't take long for the discussion to move around to other aspects, such as eating disorders, obesity, alcohol etc.

 

This to me is sailing uncomfortably close to aspects of the 'perfect race' which we've seen before in the history books. http://www.dj-forum.co.uk/html//emoticons/fear.gif .

 

Who are going to be discriminated against next?, the overweight?, those who enjoy a pint?, Single parents?. Interesting that drug abuse never came into the debate, or those suffering from STD's, arent these just as prolific and a burden on the NHS as the other issues, whilst still being the result of people's lifestyle choices and decisions?.

 

Don't get me wrong, after losing members of my family to smoking related illnesses I am also opposed to smoking, but not at the expense of people's liberties. Far better to spend the money, on education, which obviously isn't working too well given the numbers of young teens and even children who smoke routinely. How is the ban on smoking going to stop this?, they aren't old enough to go into pubs, and most are getting hooked on the habit long before they are. http://www.dj-forum.co.uk/html//emoticons/smile.gif

[partychris 0]

QUOTE (High Fidelity @ Feb 15 2006, 01:47 PM)

QUOTE (partychris @ Feb 15 2006, 11:23 AM) Must be so nice to work in them Unless you're a smoker. http://www.dj-forum.co.uk/html//emoticons/rolleyes.gif oh yea sorry !! http://www.dj-forum.co.uk/html//emoticons/stupid.gif

[jeffwall 0]

i see both sides

 

However passive smoking is nothing compared to london fog!! http://www.dj-forum.co.uk/html//emoticons/tongue.gif

 

And drinking is proved to be far far far much more of a social problem than smoking.....

 

I smoke when in a "smoking environment" (wont do it when foods about or if asked not too etc....respect those who dont of course)

 

But i dont go and batter the wife after a fag

I dont Kick the crap out of a lad walking down the street after a fag

And i dont start mouthing off like the drunks in the pub/club after a fag

And i dont visit the hospital as much as drunks do! (or people theyve affected/battered/abused do!

 

so its another tell you how to lead your life rule, in the other hand promote 24 hr drinking! mmmmmmmmmmmm

[Gary 0]

It right sometimes to wonder "whatever next?", however, I can see how the passive smoking issue alone could have helped push this law through.

 

After all, in a room of say 100 people, if 2 people want to slip themselves an e-tab, or take some other drug by mouth - they're "only" affecting their own health, the other 98 in the room are completely unaffected - unless the 2 high-as-a-kite idiots decide to attempt to drive home, or some other such indirect accident happens.

 

However, if 2 people decide to light up a few cigarettes in that same room, those immediately around them are being affected. To what degree? Well a quick look at a .Org site via google, suggests "Secondhand smoke is also known as involuntary smoking or passive smoking ... Two hours in a smoky bar is the same as smoking nearly four cigarettes". A non-smoking DJ doing a gig at that same bar would effectively have had 8 cigarettes that night - the equivilent of 416 ciggies per year if its a weekly gig. A member of non-smoking member of bar-staff there 5 nights a week would be on the equivient of 40 ciggies per week, or 2080 ciggies per year - without ever lighting up.

 

 

[Dj_Kray 0]

I dont smoke but also think people should be able to do most thinks as long as they dont harm other people but smoking does harm me i play out 4 to 5 nights a week in clubs full of smoke my clothes stink of smoke the next day and i always wake up feeling rough so would love a ban but also have the way we are going in the uk i.e nanny state

[jamminroadshow 0]

Well Labour are at it again they like to have total control over everything that we do. Smoking is something that you choice to do and that is the way it should be,

People die from smoking yes but people die in cars (o wait they are having a go at that 2)

 

People die from everything i mean a few years back they said that water was dangerous it is part of life death and we need to accept that. Smoking may kill people but it is there choice and you are in more danger if you are passive smoking everyday. Tony does not seem to be banning it from the home and that is where its most dangerous !!!!!

[ChrisPointon 0]

Driving with a mobile phone is also proven to kill innocent people too, even entire families, and unlike passive smoking it's an action which can also bring criminal charges of reckless driving or on occasion even manslaughter to the perpertrator!, yet a huge number of the populus still choose to risk doing this and on a regular basis, a full 15 months after the legislation came into force.

 

In fact, whilst the legislation may have forced a lot of professional drivers and reps to comply or fit car kits, there seems to be more private motorists than ever before, especially youngsters, still driving along with their phones glued to their ear.

 

Why should this no smoking law be treated any differently?, if people are willing to drive for miles weaving across the road and risk their lives and other peoples just to answer a call from their boy/girlfriend, is a small fine for smoking going to be any deterant?.

[Jimbo55 0]

I have Asthma..

 

http://www.dj-forum.co.uk/html//emoticons/071.gif

 

I for one, am very pleased.

 

Why should I and others be forced into inhailing a proven Carcinogen.

 

Those of us who employ staff need to take this very seriously.

 

The post that mentions allowing smoking on the shop floor should get the person to take legal advice and maybe take out a private claim. I suspect that H&E has not been informed properly of this. Under the recent Disability Act the employer has a duty to disabled staff.

 

In the Act, Disabled also covers certain illnesses.

 

Jimbo

[jamminroadshow 0]

He we go someone has ashma so the first thing they say is sue. Ban cars Ban smoking Ban Gas fires as they all effect ashma.

 

If ashma is bad then do not do the job that you do i mean you would not be night watchman/woman if you were blind would you. My cousin has ashma and smokes (i do not agree with it and when she runs out of them i refuse to take her the shop).

 

All Dj's should protect themselfs and have a oxygen mask on stand by http://www.dj-forum.co.uk/html//emoticons/biggrin.gif http://www.dj-forum.co.uk/html//emoticons/tongue.gif http://www.dj-forum.co.uk/html//emoticons/1106.gif

[mick 0]

It will be nice to return from a gig without bringing the stink of smoke back with me, I can smell it in my van all the time and yet no one has ever smoked in there.

It also mucks up your lights just look in side one and see the evidence - mick

[RichardP 0]

A friend of mine once gave up his mobile work, due to a slightly unhealthy work-life balance affecting his marriage... every now & then he'd get sentimental and to satiate his cravings, would nip into the garage and crack open one of his equipment cases to inhale that aged smokey-electrical-equipmenty type odour.... ahhh http://www.dj-forum.co.uk/html//emoticons/laugh.gif

[Jimbo55 0]

Jamminroadshow

 

So what advice would you give to someone that had tried hard to find a solution to make his/her work environment a safer place. Reguardless of the fact that the person has Asthma. They may be suffering from any other illness or bullying.

 

Everyone has a right to a safe working environment.

 

If you are an employer you have to have written Health and Safety policies (unless you employ less than 5 people). Most insurance companies will now advise employers to have a smoking policy of some sort because it leaves them (the insurance company) liable for any subsiquent claims made against the employer.

 

 

The 80db noise limit in the work place will have a greater direct impact on us.

 

It would seem from many of the threads on this forum that many people do not understand or have underestimated the liabilites and resposibilities that we have as contractors/employers.

 

Jimbo

[brianmole 0]

QUOTE (jamminroadshow @ Feb 15 2006, 05:16 PM)

He we go someone has ashma so the first thing they say is sue. Ban cars Ban smoking Ban Gas fires as they all effect ashma. If ashma is bad then do not do the job that you do i mean you would not be night watchman/woman if you were blind would you. My cousin has ashma and smokes (i do not agree with it and when she runs out of them i refuse to take her the shop). All Dj's should protect themselfs and have a oxygen mask on stand by http://www.dj-forum.co.uk/html//emoticons/biggrin.gif http://www.dj-forum.co.uk/html//emoticons/tongue.gif http://www.dj-forum.co.uk/html//emoticons/1106.gif

WHAT ARE YOU ON ABOUT? http://www.dj-forum.co.uk/html//emoticons/fear.gif

 

Every one has a right to work in a safe environment. A lot of people have asthma which is only triggered by smoke. This can only be a good thing for all.

[ian . 0]

Personally, I don't think it'll last or be able to be full enforced.

It's a breach of peoples human rights not to be allowed to smoke when they go out.

What about banning drinking?

There are loads of fat overweight government ministers out there who could benefit from that, and probably a few DJ's as well! http://www.dj-forum.co.uk/html//emoticons/hide.gif

The drinks and leisure industry will hit back.

 

Ian.

 

 

 

 

ps... Smokers Rule! http://www.dj-forum.co.uk/html//emoticons/thumbup.gif http://www.dj-forum.co.uk/html//emoticons/363.gif http://www.dj-forum.co.uk/html//emoticons/363.gif

[jamminroadshow 0]

Suing does not solve the issue thats my point. The issue that I am raising is the fact that people have the right to smoke. ok in work it is wrong but going down the sue route will lead to his firing (there is no union so he will stand little chance of fighting them).

 

Your insurance goes up all the time for people claiming everytime they have a "accident" (That word does not seem to happen anymore as theres always blame). My point about the suing had nothing to do with the smoking issue just the fact that u implied that that should be the next thing to do.

 

 

[C.S 0]

People have a right to smoke as long as it doesnt affect other people which means they should do it outside ! Cancer and kols are illnesses that you can die from and are caused from passive smoking. My wife is a non smoking waitress, if she dies of lung cancer due to passive smoking then of course someone is going to get sued! I smoked for 25 years and gave up, i have never smoked in my own house. I can assure you that the anti smoking ban will be enforced in Britain. The points brought up on this thread have been brought up in several countries as the ban has been started , the outcome has been the same everytime.

Edited February 17, 2006 by C.S

[Jimbo55 0]

Jamminroadshow

 

Why are you assuming that the person would sue for money? Many claims or actions are made just to ensure that rights are upheld and implimented. The judge or jury may decide that compensation over and above costs be awarded.

 

Many businesses in the past chose not to impliment safe working practice because it was cheaper to pay for staff out sick or pay compesation for injuries. Many companies also chose not tell staff about risks of processes and materials they were handling. This practice was widespread in the sixities and people forget that many of the industrial strikes in the seventies were not just about union power but about better working practice and conditions.

 

Laws are now there to protect us from employers who would do this to us in our workplace.

 

There may not always be blame. Many insurances companies will pay out small claims or make an out of court settlement simply because of the cost of going to court. A barrister can typically earn over £600 per hour. For a barrister to make a determination of a case it can costs thousands. An insurance company will minimise costs and this one way they can do this.

 

Jimbo

[jamminroadshow 0]

QUOTE (Jimbo55 @ Feb 17 2006, 09:27 AM)

There may not always be blame. Many insurances companies will pay out small claims or make an out of court settlement simply because of the cost of going to court. A barrister can typically earn over £600 per hour. For a barrister to make a determination of a case it can costs thousands. An insurance company will minimise costs and this one way they can do this. Jimbo

There is my point the cost money is a big issue in suing whether it is actual money or barristers it still a lot of money. The better option is to leave the place if you are put in danger i would not work somewhere like that as they seem not to care about the worker which is sad.

 

I am not saying take no action but there are other things that you can do thats all.

[Mo The Motown Man 0]

I smoked for over 40 years (40 a day) packed up over 3 years ago, no I am not anti smoking neither am I anti this or anti that life is to short as it is, life is not a dress rehearsal, what you put in to life is what you get out, so if people what to smoke, if people want to have a same sex relationship that's fine by me,BUT PLEASE DO NOT GO ON ABOUT, enjoy life

[Jimbo55 0]

QUOTE

enjoy life

 

Never a truer phrase. Life is short enough as it is.

 

Jimbo

[KrazyKaz 0]

QUOTE (blackvynil @ Feb 17 2006, 01:49 PM)

no I am not anti smoking neither am I anti this or anti that life is to short as it is, life is not a dress rehearsal, what you put in to life is what you get out, so if people what to smoke, if people want to have a same sex relationship that's fine by me,BUT PLEASE DO NOT GO ON ABOUT, enjoy life

totally agree

[Dukesy 0]

Well, come the summer of 2007.......and I wonder how the impact on the Pubs and Clubs will affect the entertainers.....

 

Yikes! http://www.dj-forum.co.uk/html//emoticons/sad.gif

[Jimbo55 0]

Don't see it as a problem. More non smokers will probably attend.

 

Jimbo

[transeurope 0]

I knew this topic would get heated, so I waited for a while before posting.

 

Like CS, I work in a state where this is already law.

 

I am a smoker, before somebody points that out.

 

This has had a pretty dramatic effect on mediocre venues and DJs. You can talk all you want about more people going out etc, but it doesn't happen and has never happened in Ireland or any of the US states that introduced this ban. The number going out declines. Period.

 

Personally I have adapted. I think I outlined this in another thread ages ago, so if you want to see the details do a search.

 

Every place that has seen this ban enforced ends up with declining numbers and only the innovative survive.