Tobacco Documents Online

Working Together Smokers and Non-Smokers at the Workplace

Working Together INTRODUCTION Although there has been much publicity around the world about the effects of tobacco smoke on the quality of air in indoor areas, scientists do not agree about its impact on indoor air quality. Environmental tobacco smoke, or ETS for short, is a mixture of sidestream and exhaled mainstream smoke. Sidestream smoke is wisps of smoke from the burning end of the cigarette, cigar or pipe. Immediately after sidestream and exhaled mainstream smoke are released into an indoor environment, they become greatly diluted and dispersed. As they do, they change both quantitatively and qualitatively. ETS becomes quite distinct from either mainstream or sidestream smoke. A significant proportion of adults smoke, so in~any office, shop or factory, a large number of staff are likely to be smokers. The Air We Breathe Seeing Smoke ETS is one of very few constituents of air that can be easily seen and smelt. However, even where ETS is absent because smoking is bannedy air quality problems often exist. SMOKING AT WORK Most people spend a great deal of their time at the workplace, yet have little control over their working environment. Anti-smoking groups, who are waging a global propaganda war about the alleged health effects of ETS,, blame many workplace air quality problems and complaints on ETS. Many people choose to smoke, others do not. Some people don't mind others smoking, some do. There is no need for this diffeaence of opinion to be a problem. Inadequate ventilation is common in buildings, according to scientific surveys. The effects of poor ventilation on health are well documented: The Things You Can't See Indoor air contains significant quantities of many invisible gases from a number of sources: carbon dioxide from people breathing out;, nitrogen dioxide and carbon monoxide from vehicle exhaust, cookers and heaters; and formaldehyde and other gases from furnishings, carpets and insulation materials. In addition to gases, indoor air can contain minute particles of household dust and dust mites; fibres from clothing, carpets, insulation or furnishings; bacteria; and the spores from various fungi. Other indoor air constituents may include vapours from cleaning products, insecticides and photocopying fluid, to name but a few. Any of these, in sufficient quantities, can make people feel unwell. The Scientists Disagree Many scientists have studied ETS and have arrived at varying conclusions, as demonstrated in the scientific guides. ETS is a complex subject where scientific bias can occur, such as failure to consider important life-style factors other than exposure to ETS, or through combining uncertain results from a number of studies to reach "definitive" conclusions. The simple fact is that scientists don't agree among themselves that ETS affects the health of non-smokers. Inadequate ventilation at the workplace can lead to sore eyes, headaches, a tickly cough or runny nose. These symptoms are collectively known as 'sick building syndrome ". Sick Building Syndrome Many buildings have insufficient or badly-maintained air conditioning systems, windows that cannot be opened and a lot of unwell people inside. The effects of 'sick building syndrome' have become so significant that specialists are needed to advise companies on air quality control in offices. Pagel

i Working Together One of the more experienced of these specialists is the president of Healthy Buildings International in the United States. In a presentation to the 1989 International Symposium on ETS at Canada's McGill University, he stated: "To put these problems into perspective, we have reviewed our data base (ASHRAE) on over 400 buildings: Our data, as well as data published by NIOSH, the U.S. National Institute for Occupational Health and Safety, confirm three factors as the major causes of sick building syndrome." Inadequate ventilation: when insufficient fresh air is being bought into the buildings to dilute all the pollutants that naturally accumulate with time. Poor filtration: when filters that are designed to catch larger dirt particles become loose, torn or clogged; rendering them ineffective. Other factors are inefficient, cheap filters and careless installation. Contamination: when air con- ditioning systems - often consisting of miles of dirty ductwork - become prime breeding grounds for bacteria, moulds and fungi, many of whicK can cause illness and death. The conclusion reached was that "It would be naive to assume that the removal or control of ETS, the most visible indoor air pollutant, would solve the indoor air pollution problems found in 'sick buildings'. That step ignores the many hidden sources of indoor contamination, and can lead, at least in the short run, to a false sense of security." Steps To Providing Clean Indoor Air When asked in a 1989 interview about ways to provide clean indoor air, the president of Healthy Buildings International suggested the following: ~ mandate minimum ventilation rates ~ mandate high efficiency filtration systems w- legislate to have regular inspections to ensure that ventilation systems are kept clean. "If you do that you automatically reduce every single pollutant in the building, and I'm absolutely convinced that once you have a building operating with a well-tuned and well-maintained ventilating system the tobacco smoke issue is a non-issue."' People and Productivity Anti-smokers, trying to justify calis for workplace smoking bans, claim that smokers are responsible for uncprmining, efficiency on the job - both directly and indirectly. Researchers who have studied the working environment of office workers, trade union representatives, managers, airline pilots and students have reported, however, that smoking does not decrease performance. It is sick building problemss and factors other than ETS that are affecting people's well-being. It is therefore a priority for business managers to ensure the provision of high standards in indoor air ventilation, filtration and cleanliness, to achieve optimum productivity. Living and Working Together Many people choose to smoke and too do so at work. If there are problems, or complaints about smoke or srnells, the quality of the air supply is the most likely culprit. The solution~ may simply be to correctly maintain the ventilation system. In one study, which compared `smoking' and `non-smoking' offices, the levels of carbon monoxide and other volatile chemicals were indistinguishable between the two. Even though ETS is visible, the amount of ETS in the air of offices where people smoke is usually very small indeed. Whilst it is not at all valid to compare exposure to ETS with that of active smoking it is possible to give an~ impression of the amounts of exposure involved (based on measurements of nicotine andparticulate matter) ass illustrated by the following example: Scientific studies carried out in the United States and Canada collected samples from over 100 different offices,, none of which had smoking restrictions. Testing was conducted only in offices where the workplace was shared by two or more persons, at least one of whom smoked. Results showed that non-smokers were exposed to minimal amounts of ETS. For example, a non-smoker working in a typical office would have to work for hundreds of hours to be exposed to the "equivalent" of one cigarette. N O N O ~ Page 2

Working Together NO SMOKING - BY ORDER? Smoking may be restricted where, for example, food is prepared, and this is generally well accepted. However, to ban smoking for no good reason invites problems and does little to promote harmony and goodwill. Regulations mean that the wishes of some are being imposed on others, leading to possible resentment and conflict. In most work situations, there is no 'smoking problem' nor is one likely. In others, an informal, approach to people's preferences allows for individual attention and effective solutions, while avoiding the need for rules and enforcement. The Informal Approach For workplaces not restricted by legal requirements, an informal approach cann avoid'. the need for formal rules. Complaints should be handled as they occur and at the lowest level of supervision. Most of the problems should be worked out, between the people directly involved, if at alli possible. Orders from management are bound to be seen by one group or another as unfair. In resolving conflicts:  Reasonable allowances should be made for non-smokers bothered by smoke. For example, the non-smoker or the smoker could be moved to another desk, or a fan or air purifier could be put on the desk.  Over-regulation should be avoided. It has been found that situations are best resolved through mutual agreement.  Avoid company-wide smoking policies,, as far as possible. The handling of complaints should be left~ to individual managers. Although the informal approach should work best for most organizations,, others may decide that there is a need for a more formal approach. This can take the form of guidelines or a formal policy. Written Guidelines Guidelines should state the organization's philosophy about its employees relative to workplace srnoking and provide direction on~ the resolution of conflict. Guidelines must be in the best interest of the organization as a whole, and thus assure continuation of a productive and co-operative working environment. They should recognize and respect the rights of smokers and non-smokers alike. Formal Policy The formal policy represents the most rigid approach to workplace smoking. Nevertheless, for the organization that feels it must establish a formali policy, some factors deserve special consideration: • Input from each ernployee group should be sought and considered.  The goal should be to promote and maintain a productive and co-operative work environment, so conflict should be minimized and co-operation encouraged.  The rights of both the smoker and the non-smoker should be considered in all decision-making.  The fact that non-smokers may outnumber smokers is not sufficient reason to impose a total ban, The test of any democratic system is how, it respects individuals and protects minorities.  Decisions affecting smoking in the workplace should be based on an understanding of the scientific facts concerning tobacco smoke, not on unsupported claims or personal value judgements. Whatever form the company approach to ETS takes, the overall tone should communicate respect for the wishes of all employees and organizational opposition to unfair and unreasonable restrictions. . Page3

ii N 0 N ~ ~ 00 ~