Smoking in the workplace often results in higher expenses for employers. It has been estimated that on the average each employee who smokes costs the employer between $2,000 and $6,000 a year in the United States (as reported by Health Canada, 1996). These costs are attributed to increased absenteeism, property damage, and health and fire insurance costs. Other studies report that non-smoking employees have difficulty concentrating where ETS is present.

Studies have shown that smoke-free environments also make for increased productivity, better morale, and lower cleaning costs.

These factors, along with health concerns, have led many regulators and employers to institute smoking controls in the workplace. Some have introduced policies that restrict smoking in the workplace, or limit certain types of jobs to non-smoking employees. Others offer programs designed to encourage and assist employees to give up smoking. Hasn't smoking been regulated in the workplace for years and years?

Traditionally, smoking has been not been allowed in situations that involve working with flammable, combustible and/or explosive materials. In these situations tobacco smoking is not restricted to protect people from the health effects of ETS but rather to protect them from the obvious fire and explosion hazards.

In other situations, smoking has been banned as a measure to prevent hand-to-mouth digestion of chemicals. Food, drink, and cigarettes are frequently contaminated by contact with unwashed hands, gloves or clothing, or by being left exposed in the workplace.

Since the early 1990s, however, health concerns about exposure to ETS have broadened legislation. What jurisdictions in Canada have regulated ETS in the workplace?

Federal, and most provincial jurisdictions, have a formal law or regulation that restricts smoking in the workplace to a varying extent. The exceptions are New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island, Nunavut, the Yukon, and Northwest Territories.

Regulations are not the same from province to province so it is important that local authorities are consulted. A list of Canadian governmental occupational health & safety departments is located on OSH Answers at http://www.ccohs.ca/oshanswers/information/govt.html Generally speaking, what do the regulations say?

Some jurisdictions have banned smoking from the building entirely while others have restricted smoking to specific rooms or areas. In some cases, smoking is restricted in public buildings (including provincial government offices) but the restriction does not apply to other workplaces. Where smoking is permitted in a specific room or area, these areas must meet certain criteria in terms of the uses of the room and ventilation.

Where smoking is not permitted in the workplace, it is often restricted from any area that is considered a work space. A "work space" may mean any indoor or other enclosed space in which employees perform the duties of their employment, and includes any adjacent corridor, lobby, stairwell, elevator, cafeteria, washroom or other common area frequented by such employees while they are at work. In some workplaces, this ban has been extended to include company vehicles as well.

Public entertainment facilities (such as restaurants, bars and games rooms) and other establishments (such as long-term residential facilities including extended care facilities and prisons) present a unique situation. Debate has centered on two main concerns: on one hand these places are public spaces or they are considered a residence where smoking has traditionally been permitted, but on the other hand it is a workplace and the rights of the employees need to be considered. Again, local provincial or municipal regulations should be consulted to determine what the law is for your area or situation. What options are available when setting a workplace policy?

Smoking restriction policies range from minor measures to total bans.

Initially some companies attempted to deal with the smoking problem by segregating smokers and nonsmokers. This approach requires smoking and nonsmoking workstations, office areas, lunch areas, and lounges. Although this approach is intended to satisfy both smokers and nonsmokers, it is not entirely effective. Tobacco smoke is not eliminated under this system because it is almost impossible to remove tobacco smoke from buildings by ventilation or other means such as electrostatic filters. Therefore, some ETS will drift over from the smoking to the nonsmoking areas. In addition, neither smokers nor nonsmokers are satisfied by this segregated arrangement. Nonsmokers continue to object to drifting tobacco smoke and smokers dislike being segregated from their colleagues.

In practice, there are basically two options to consider:

1. A "smoke-free" policy that would not allow smoking inside any building or company vehicle. It may or may not permit smoking in designated outdoor locations.
2. A policy that allows for separately ventilated areas.