Jump to:

Lorillard

Economic Justification for Worksite Smoking Policies

Date: 05 Feb 1990 (est.)
Length: 12 pages
88772573-88772584
Jump To Images
snapshot_lor 88772573-88772584

Fields

Author
Tollison, R.D.
Wagner, R.E.
Alias
88772573/88772584
Type
REPT, OTHER REPORT
BIBL, BIBLIOGRAPHY
Area
CROUSE,WILLIAM/BASEMENT GMP
Litigation
Stmn/Produced
Characteristic
EXTR, EXTRA
Site
G10
Named Organization
Auburn Univ
Bureau of Economics
Clemson Univ
Cornell Univ
Fl State Univ
Ftc, Federal Trade Commission
George Mason Univ Fairfax Va
Office of Technology Assessment
Presidents Council of Economic Advisors
Southern Economic Assn
Tulane Univ
Tx A+M Univ
Univ of Ca Irvine
Univ of Va
Urban Inst
Va Tech
Master ID
88772371/2597
Related Documents:
Named Person
Ault
Behrens, R.
Buchanan, J.M.
Ekelund
Jackson
Kristein
Luce
Rice
Saba
Saurman
Schweitzer
Tollison, R.D.
Wagner, R.E.
Weis
Date Loaded
12 Feb 1999
UCSF Legacy ID
hgh30e00

Document Images

Text Control

Highlight Text:

OCR Text Alignment:

Image Control

Image Rotation:

Image Size:

Page 11: hgh30e00 Log in for more options!
t once it is recognized that indoor air contains numerous other things, the relative significance of cigarette smoke diminishes even further, which in turn makes even less plausible the claim that smoking is a sionificant source of ventilation costs, in most cases. In sum, there is no economic justification for workplace smoking rules, except those ru:les which have been voluntarily adopted by firms and workers in the absence of government policy. Firms have clear incentives to produce their output at least cost. In this respect, even if smokers are more costly employees (a point of view with which we disagree), they will be employed because they add more to a firm's revenues than to its cost, i.e., !:hey are productive workers. To focus on the alleged costs of hiring a particular. type of worker is totally beside the point. The point is to hire the best workers, among which will often be found smokers. Whether through open competition for workers or through collective bargaining, the prope:- approach to workplace smoking is to allow companies and employees to decide upon the appropriate smoking policy on a company-by-company basis. Government is not required to solve this problem. 11
Page 12: hgh30e00 Log in for more options!
I Reference s 1. Ault, R.W., R.B. Ekelund, J.D. Jackson, R.S. Saba and D.S. Saurman, "Smoking and Abse Study," Auburn, Alabama (1988). nteeism: An Empirical r 1 2. Luce, B.L. and S.O. Schweitzer, "Smoking and Alcohol i Abuse: A Comparison of their E conomic C onsequences," New England Journal of Medicine 298, 569-571 (1978). 3. Kristein, M.M., "How Much Can B usiness Expect to Profit From Smoking Cessation?" Preve ntive Medicine, 12: 358-381 (1983). 4. Office of Technology Assessment , U.S. Congress, "Smoking-Related Deaths and Fin ancial Costs." Washington., D.C. (OTA Staff Mem orandum 1985). 5. Rice, D.P., T.A. Hodgson, P. Si nsheimer, W. Browner and A.N. Kopstein, "The Economic Costs of the Health Effects of Smoking, 1984" The Milbank Quarterly, 64: (4) Cambridge University Press (1986). 6. Weis, W.L., "No Ifs, Ands or Buts: Why Workplace Smoking Should Be Banned," Management World, 339-44, (Sept. 1981). i 12 t

Text Control

Highlight Text:

OCR Text Alignment:

Image Control

Image Rotation:

Image Size: