Tobacco Documents Online

W SPECIAL REPORT ON INVOLUNTARY SMOKING Legal liability for permitting smoking Even without the new evidence now available in the EPA Report, workers have long been able to recover com- pensation for injuries caused by expo- sure to tobacco smoke. So far, they have been successful under a variety of legal theories and doctrines: - • common law and negligence: when an employer fails to provide a rea- sonably safe and healthful work- place, even in the absence of a statute; • worlters'compenSaQott: destgt2edto compensate workers for job-nlated injuries and health problems; • unemployment insurance: protects workers who lose their jobs through no fault of their own; • disability: to protect workers made unable to work; and even • discrimination: unfair retaliation against nonsmokers In addition, a number of rulings held that persons who are sensitive to tobac- co smoke are "handicapped persons." That meant that entities covered by the law at the time - governments and large recipients of federal funds - had to make a reasonable accommodation to protect such people. Since the new Americans With Dis- abilities Act (ADA) imposes the same obligations on virtually all businesses, many more legal actions under this theory are likely to be filed and to be successful: Already, ASH has filed an ADA complaint against an airport, and ADA lawsuits have been filed against McDonald's and other fast-food oudets. The EPA Report is likely to make it much easier for employees to prove the harmful effect of ETS in all of the types of cases outlined above:' It is also likely to open the door for new types of'suits. For example, a child brought into the smoking section of a fast-food restau- rant or other public place could sue the owner if he or she suffered an asthmatic attack or other medical problem as a result. In such a suit, the carelessness of the adult who brought the child into the smoking section is not a valid legal Cases of Particular Intacst Smoke drifting up from a first- floor smoking area into a second- floor classroom was enough to trigger chronic lung disease in a teacher who was awarded $29,999.1 ' A waiter who suffered a heart attack as a result of working in a smoke-filled bar received $95,000! A secretary was held to be "envi ronmentally disabled" because she could not work where she was exposed to tobacco smoke. Her employer paid her $50,000 plus $500/mo for the rest of her life, even though she was free to work in any other smoke-free ofiice.3 Pointing out that smoking was banned in one room because it adversely, affected a computer, a jttdge, even prior to evidence of long-term health hazards from ETS, ordered a smoking ban in the office of a smoke-sensitive employee.' An Army employee sensitive to tobacco smoke was a "handiatpped person' under the Federal Rehabili- tation Act, and his employer was required to make a reasonable acn commodation too his handicap.' ' A government employee had no right to smoke, and could be fired for smoking even one cigarette on his own time off the job ` 1. Sdilfrr lo A.{ir tJ.Trd seled tlisriet PAS 456, PAS 1H4 LA fOP1M GiL War19e1 Co.p.reioa . APP..Y sord. .3/1tY9k . i UbW .lu.r C.o.w.rins f...ra.nF..d, CGt'N' F'sd& Rstrt,a (CaM Waken' C"pa...ie. AppeJt sord 1994 . a. Prodi . Heeii $P..r Praeeme. tard 6f0FId7f1 Qd Ge.1liA; @4. 56:.P R Ner J.sey !d T.I¢a.r CaapW. 3" A]d 4W (197Qt • i P{wr . D.pta..e .f the Ae.y. Ut Mai spas Ptanctior toni Naa Qi0/5L010099, (3D1S20 2fo1 a9Uk ..er.hs Yrc}as.. The Vetcma Ad.i.irtauoq 54 F. S.pp tS (t9t2k • War.. o[6rs d Pasmed Ma..~smeae oArir Sy.ms Praecom De.rd D.d. R.po.dOf&e,Darlw No. DA 11n;361tt314.1)f6k.. " e Ge..mdvf .. C+q d Okla6ooa Csy..t16F2d:S» (fah.Gr. ,1917):. Page 9 defense for the business. Similar legal actions could also be brought on behalf of young children who suffered medical problems as a result of exposure in the smoking sec- tions of airplanes on overseas flights. Some of the legal precedents involving exposure to tobacco smoke are dis- cussed or cited on this page. COMKON tAWa Heatrd . smger 183 CaL RPor 1Sf (APp. tri* . s.mi . Weaem F.kcuic Caop.er 643 S.w 2d Qfo. ApP.19U). NEGi1GFNCE MsC.thy v. DW.nost of Social HealiL se.irer,11o Waik 2d e1; nt P2d 331(191g. VORAU[EN5 COMPFSdSATION: Drooks . Tne. World Airrsa a 4L Calitam Warkmea•. Compmotim Appab loud, Cssc No. 7i ff 257-975 (19T1k Gscho6v r. Mooeni. EeD Tckp6o"e N] 1. App. 690 P1d 1231(1911k " Eatchelor. Freaw CaAsF (C.ati(or.iaj a9t2); • le t6e Maaer aE tLe CorrrfMUUm d llarlrae W. Richie- Oregon Vorkes' Compes.mo. Doad. . V7C3 Cye No.1447241t, t71im No. D69060t. Wm No. ~1eoe. sSN: 5/3465621(196Sk •!e the Msster o[ the Compees+eim o[ Mary A. DorxA Ot"Walurs' Camp.aotsa. eona WC6 Gm No. t}01911. dim Na DWS1l0• Dot 1at}t2, Wm File Nw c3sV9o, SSN 543-14oq3 p91Sk ) ma R El.e. Na 0953 232 (NY. Workas' CAMP. Eb Dac 19p) {WFSTLAw MWG ADI@7 d4eab..p 19Rt WL 1917 D4k • ja6amaea. New York 6tF Degnmmt d Huaeeg Prera.mos aed De.dop.as 154 AD 7d7S3,S46NY3.Zd40(H{9k 13 LiFaht. Witea.deDeE• 1"c. (Vrrom.is Labor md fedisai.l R..ie.reom.irdr, - No. Ifa0DiJ6,19" • Dm. LtamehmemTnrapis Mrie~ ptePoet a[ Adm:nttaur c Jdge d de Deprt.ea d Ldrei.. .. _ Acride.t Puoee Sod®oe) Board No. 0922081, oeober 3I. 191!t); r sdwert . T6. Clyld Ce.ev ('Roekas' Ca.Pa.ntiu. eata of tedi.e. Appbcuios Number 112470, J.wuy t. 19M UNEMPLOYA4Nr INSTJRANCE H«im.e. N.YS. Deprr- mmt of tabor, FJ1. Rtwo leearP. SS.A. f10a32-1465, Appnl 2S1s14 Refer« 76•32ls3 (19)6k • Meyer . CP. C]ue a"d Cempsay et. il., Ind,mial.Caamisam of Idaho DOE 61S7t (197tk • Akasder v. uaemplormem Lm. Appmlr Db 104 CGL App. 3d 97. Cal. Rper 411 (19Wh  Emis aed SaorLma"s Eraa• • Pe.ql.,ni- u.rapiqmeae comPm- eaane afRe.- Appel No. Ei31A.14, D.ciooa No. bZ1t501 (1"* ' McCior4w-.. Empbymmt Devebpmst.Dcpuamm a&L 136: Gf. App. 3d 1067 20 Cal. Rpor 156 rAL APP. 2 Dic. D:vi. s 19t4k . t.P6am v. Cammon.nakh Uarmplopmtat Campam tioe eontd s19 A1d 1101 (Pa. CG.aah. t9a). Dt9Qtn@(ATION AC.AMSTNONSKOftFitt Tari WaP.. Me Atet,.. Ap.g leiaat DEami..oio. EOC CG..,M3. F.pl opPOtc.een c.mm. Gty.E MaaeR vne".:• 0914 . Dq.re.eat a( Fair Emptormant ..d Fioal.g R Fims eaay.C.GFa.:. Fair Fmpleymeat and Hw:ft coaniou" Cas Nd.FF3piZ CJ000lpA (19isk •Dep.etmesr. d F.ir Es.pioramc a.d HoYrieg v. c,wwty a(. Fra"a Depntmat dsacial Ser:icssG.e Ner. FEPt2J2 C900Mp. FEMM Cl01Qr. N21643 FEPf223 C9-0OtSP. FEPt2J3 dC199re N21652 (3915} Caustp of Fremo.. Fair EmploTtewt and Housing Comisu aon d the State of CGlifornir • 6roekss md CGPe, Rsal Patiet i. VNket• (k d App. Soee o( CGlifar.ia. FiG6 APP. Dis. 266 Cil. App. 3a 1541, 77l Cal Rptr 555. Jse..ry 23,1991). FMF1lAL REHAnnIiAT10N ACT CASES (D1sA3n1TT AND HAND1GPk Ftuu'ken .. Offiee of Pewe.d M+.ags- ment• US. Merit Sy>t<na Protection bo.rd D.11.s Fidd OBicr-' No. DAi3iL100n1. (11l0); a W6iae .. United Starn Ponal Ser++cr (E9uaJ EmDkY~ DPP-sy. Cwnmis+wcn, Appeal No1ts3424 1924 . ;: This is a speua" issue of the ASN Smoking osd'NeJtb Revicv{1SSN 1046-907X0): Copyrighted by Action on Smoking and Health (ASH). 2ai3 H: St., N W, Wssh.• DC 20006, 0-02)i659.431p: ASH is a national nonprofit, tax-cxempt organization concerned with the problcros of smoking and the rights of nonsmokers. ASH is entirc!v supported by tudeductib!e contributions, and regul6r contributors receive the ASH Ref.iev. Printed portions of tlie ASH Revicv may be reprinted with credit to ASH:. zoz3s6ssss