Philip Morris
the Smoking Policy Handbook
Fields
- Type
- MANU, MANUAL, HANDBOOK, CATALOGUE
- FORM, FORM
- Area
- SLAVITT,JOSHUA/OFFICE
- Site
- N340
- Named Person
- Firman, W.
- Named Organization
- Natl Interagency Council Smoking Health
- Nel
- New England Mutual Life Insurance
- San Jose Chamber of Commerce
- San Jose City Clerks Office
- Santa Clara County Mfg Group
- Sears Roebuck
- Travelers Insurance
- American Lung Assn Santa Clara Sa Benito
- City Council of San Jose
- Hewlett Packard
- Nel
- Request
- Stmn/R1-037
- Stmn/R1-102
- Document File
- 2025684071/2025684856/Americans for Non Smokers
- 2025684072/2025684855/Americans for Non Smokers
- Litigation
- Stmn/Produced
- Author (Organization)
- City of San Jose
- San Jose Chamber of Commerce
- Santa Clara County Mfg Group
- San Jose Chamber of Commerce
- Master ID
- 2025684073/4854
Related Documents:- 2025684073
- 2025684074
- 2025684075-4854 Legislative Approaches to A Smoke Free Society
- 2025684085-4138 A Study of Public Attitudes Toward Cigarette Smoking and the Tobacco Industry in 780000
- 2025684139-4144 Proposition P: Anatomy of A Nonsmokers' Rights Ordinance. The Basics of Beating the Tobacco Industry
- 2025684145-4152 California City and County Smoking Ordinances
- 2025684153-4154 States Placing Limitations Nonsmoking in Public Places. States with Laws Addressing Smoking in the Workplace
- 2025684155-4230 Bibliography on Involuntary Smoking
- 2025684231-4232
- 2025684233-4234 Tobacco Smoke and the Nonsmoker
- 2025684235-4241 Testimony of James L. Repace in the Matter on Senate Bill 1440, the Nonsmokers' Rights Act of 850000. Before the U.S. Senate Subcommittee on Civil Service, Post Office and General Services, Committee on Governmental Affairs Washington, D.C. 850930
- 2025684242-4248 Testimony of Joseph A. Califano, Jr. Before the U.S. Senate Subcommittee on Civil Service, Post Office and General Services
- 2025684249-4255 Testimony of Alfred Munzer, M.D. On Behalf of the Coalition on Smoking or Health and Its Member Organizations the American Lung Association the American Heart Association the American Cancer Society on the Nonsmokers' Rights Act of 850000 Before the Subcommittee on Civil Service, Post Office and General Services Committee on Government Affairs U.S. Senate 850930
- 2025684256-4262 Written Testimony of Stanton A. Glantz, Ph.D. Submitted to the Subcommittee on Civil Service, Post Office, and General Services Committee on Governmental Affairs United States Senate for Hearing on S.1440 the Non-Smokers Rights Act of 850000 850930
- 2025684263-4278 Statement of the Honorable Bill Ross Commissioner Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation S-1440, on the Non-Smokers Rights Act of 850000 Before the United States Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs Washington, D.C. 850930
- 2025684279-4297 Clean Your Room A Compendium on Air Pollution
- 2025684298-4308 Indoor Pollutants
- 2025684309-4310
- 2025684311-4312 Celebrities Who Have Supported Nonsmokers' Rights
- 2025684313 Known Causes of Residential Fires National Figures for 810000
- 2025684314 Known Causes of Residential Fires California Figures for 810000
- 2025684315-4320 Tobacco Industry Conglomerates - Status Report on Diversification in the Tobacco Industry 840000 Representative Products
- 2025684321-4326 Written Testimony of Professor Marvin M. Kristein. Ph.D. Departments of Economics and Community and Preventive Medicine State University of New York at Stony Brook, New York Subcommittee on Civil Service, Post Office, and General Services Committee on Governmental Affairs United States Senate Hearing on S. 1440, to Restrict Smoking to Designated Areas in All U.S. Government Buildings 850930
- 2025684327-4349 How Much Can Business Expect to Profit From Smoking Cessation?
- 2025684350-4353 Wanted: Smoking Policies for the Work Place. Company Activities in Smoking Control
- 2025684354-4367 A Smokefree Workplace An Employers' Guide to Nonsmoking Policies
- 2025684368 California Poll Majority Would Restrict Smoking
- 2025684369-4372 Strong Sentiment to Restrict Smoking in Public Places
- 2025684373
- 2025684374-4375
- 2025684376 Summary of Results of the 830400 Survey by the Gallup Organization 'survey of Attitudes Towards Smoking'
- 2025684377 840000 Gallup Monthly Report on Eating Out
- 2025684378-4383 the Prevention Index 850000 A Report Card on the Nation's Health Summary Report
- 2025684384-4386 People of Michigan Say 'yes' - They Do Want to Limit Smoking in Public Places
- 2025684387-4389 Public Support for A State Law Restricting Smoking in Public Places
- 2025684390-4391
- 2025684392-4429 Michigan Survey 8
- 2025684430-4436 Testimony of Harry Perlstadt, Ph.D, M.P.H., Chairperson Michigan Coalition on Smoking or Health Before the Michigan House Public Health Committee Sub-Committee on H. B. 4500
- 2025684437 Summary of 800000 Minnesota Poll
- 2025684438 Good Idea Defies Smoke Screen
- 2025684439 Thy Neighbor's Lungs
- 2025684440 Smoking Your Wife to Death
- 2025684441 Oh, to Breathe in Nassau County...
- 2025684442 Contra Costa Packs It in
- 2025684443 Clearing the Air
- 2025684444-4445 Secondhand Smoke
- 2025684446 Tobacco Company Crusaders Try Weapon of 'courtesy'
- 2025684447 Cigarette Makers Set Greed Record
- 2025684448 Why Does Anyone in This Nation Still Smoke Cigarettes?
- 2025684449 Good Neighbor
- 2025684450-4451 Frisco Votes An Antidote to Smoking Poison
- 2025684452 News Item: San Francisco Passes Toughest Anti-Smoking Law in U.S.
- 2025684453 'thank You for Smoking'
- 2025684454
- 2025684455
- 2025684456-4457
- 2025684458
- 2025684459
- 2025684460
- 2025684461 5 Regulation of Smoking - Initiative Statute Argument in Favor of Proposition 5. Rebuttal to Argument in Favor of Proposition 5
- 2025684462-4474 Cigarette Smoke and the Nonsmoker
- 2025684475-4482 A Rebuttal to the Tobacco Industry's Paper, 'cigarette Smoke and the Nonsmoker'
- 2025684483-4486 Response to American Lung Association of Superior, California Document 'the Need for Smoking Control Legislation in Butte County: A Case Statement'
- 2025684487-4488
- 2025684489-4493 A Statement on the Health Effects of Passive Smoking
- 2025684494 Los Angeles City Public Smoking Issue Public Opinion Survey Summary of Findings
- 2025684495 Survey of Los Angeles City Voters 506 Interviews Margin of Error: Plus or Minus 5 Percent
- 2025684496
- 2025684496A Poll Shows L.A. Voters Oppose Anti-Smoking Law for Business
- 2025684497
- 2025684498
- 2025684499-4500 Appendix: A Slanted Poll on Smoking Law
- 2025684501-4504 Michigan Tobacco and Candy Distributors and Vendors Association Michigan Statewide Survey 850429 - 850430
- 2025684505-4506 Account of Tobacco Institute Poll in Fort Collins, Colorado, 841100
- 2025684507-4509 Tobacco Institute Poll Raising Eyebrows Here
- 2025684510-4522 Development of A Comprehensive Ordinance Regulating Smoking in Enclosed Public Places and Places of Employment
- 2025684523-4532 Regulation of Smoking in Public Places and the Workplace
- 2025684533-4549 Opinion 82 - 55 Regulation of Smoking in the Workplace in the City and County of San Francisco
- 2025684550-4565 Smoking Ordinance
- 2025684566-4577
- 2025684578-4581 Addiction Mortality in the United States, 800000: Tobacco, Alcohol, and Other Substances
- 2025684582-4605 Economic Costs of Smoking: An Analysis of Data for the United States
- 2025684606-4611 Questions and Answers on Proposed Nonsmokers' Rights Legislation
- 2025684612-4631 A Quantitative Estimate of Nonsmokers' Lung Cancer Risk From Passive Smoking
- 2025684632-4633 the Oregon Indoor Clean Air Act and You An Explanation of the Law and the Rules for Its Implementation
- 2025684634-4639 Smoking in the Workplace City of San Jose Ordinance 21830
- 2025684640 Cityline Thank You for Observing San Diego's New No Smoking Ordinance
- 2025684641-4642 Thank You for Observing San Diego's No-Smoking Ordinance
- 2025684643-4645 City of Ft. Collins No-Smoking Ordinance
- 2025684654-4655
- 2025684656 Equal Employment Opportunities 42 Uscs 2000e-2. Discrimination Because of Race, Color, Religion, Sex, or National Origin
- 2025684657 Compiled Laws Annotated 37.2202 Employer, Prohibited Acts
- 2025684658-4669 Model Smoking Pollution Control Ordinance
- 2025684670-4680 An Ordinance Amending the Los Angeles Municipal Code to Regulate Smoking in Public Places and Places of Employment.
- 2025684681-4686 Ordinance Number 0-15865 An Ordinance Amending Chapter IV, Article 5, Division 1 of the San Diego Municipal Code by Amending Sections 45.0101, 45.0102, 45,0103, 45.0104, 45. 0105, 45.0107 and 45.0108 Relating to Regulation of Smoking in Public Places and Places of Employment
- 2025684687-4689 Ordinance No. 298-83 (Health Regulations) Amending Part II, Chapter V, of the San Francisco Municipal Code (Health Code) by Adding Article 19 Thereto, Regulating Smoking in the Office Workplace
- 2025684690-4702 Ordinance No. 85-005 An Ordinance Amending Chapter 37 of the Sacramento City Code Relating to Smoking
- 2025684703-4704 Ordinance No. 85-016 An Ordinance Amending Chapter 37, Section 37.22, of the Sacramento City Code Relating to Smoking
- 2025684705-4709 Ordinance No. 3476 Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Chapter 9.14 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code to Prohibit Smoking in Elevators, Public Restrooms, and Indoor Service Lines and Regulating Smoking in the Workplace
- 2025684710-4716 Ordinance No. 16.84 An Ordinance of the City of Mountain View Repealing Section 21.46 of the Mountain View City Code, and Adding Article II to Chapter 21, Relating to the Protection of One's Right to Fresh Air Through the Prohibition and Regulation of Smoking in Certain Places
- 2025684717-4720 Proposed Ordinance Regarding Smoking in the Workplace
- 2025684721 San Francisco Anti-Smoking Law A Success
- 2025684722 Sf Controls Are Working Smokers Survive Their New Habit
- 2025684723 A Month with Smoking Law: Problems Resolved Smoothly
- 2025684724-4726 County Close to Being Smoke-Free
- 2025684727
- 2025684728-4731 No Smoking Ordinance, Implementation and Enforcement.
- 2025684732-4733
- 2025684734-4734A
- 2025684735 No Smoking Ordinance Information
- 2025684736-4738 Non-Smoking Ordinance
- 2025684739-4739A Smoking Ordinance - Status Report on Implementation of Enforcement and Effectiveness
- 2025684740-4751 the San Francisco Experience with Regulation of Smoking in the Workplace: the First Twelve Months
- 2025684752-4753
- 2025684754
- 2025684755-4757
- 2025684758-4761 Contact List for Information Regarding the Experience of California Cities Relative to Enforcement of Existing Smoking Regulation Ordinances
- 2025684762-4763
- 2025684764-4773 Testimony of Robert D. Tollison on the 'non-Smokers Rights Act of 850000' S. 1440 Before U.S. Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs Subcommittee on Civil Service, Post Office and General Services
- 2025684774-4815 Economic Impact of Instituting Smoking Prohibitions in U.S. Government Buildings
- 2025684816-4819 Pleasant Hill City Council Considers Model Smoking Law
- 2025684820 L.A. Councilman to Propose Anti-Smoking Ordinance
- 2025684821 L.A.'s Gravy Train Does the City Council Care How Tawdry It Looks?
- 2025684822 City Panel Studies No-Smoking Proposal
- 2025684823 Watered Down No-Smoking Law Gets Preliminary Ok. No-Smoking Ordinance Endorsed
- 2025684824 L.A. Council Acts to Limit Smoking at Places of Work 10-1 Vote for Measure
- 2025684825-4826 Council Adopts Tough Law on Smoking on Job
- 2025684827-4828 Conflicts Mostly Solved Few Fired Up Over L.A. Smoking Law
- 2025684829 L.A. Council Acts to Ease Curbs on Smoking at Work Victory for Businesses
- 2025684830 Tobacco Firms Act to Snuff Out Smoking Law View Weakening of L.A. Plan As Just A First Step
- 2025684831 No-Smoking Law Opponent Hosting Council at Resort. Council: Desert Retreat
- 2025684832-4833 L.A. Strengthens Draft Ordinance to Curb Smoking Penalty for Retaliation. Orange County Revives Anti-Smoking Ordinance
- 2025684834 Council Puts Some Muscle Back in L.A. Smoking Law
- 2025684835 L.A. Approves Strict on-Job Smoking Law Smoking: Law Approved, Goes to Bradley
- 2025684836 Bradley to Sign No-Smoking Ordinance, Press Aide Says
- 2025684837 the Region Law's Opposition Doused
- 2025684838 Clock Running for No-Smoking Plans
- 2025684839-4841 Smoking on the Job No More Ifs, Ands, Butts - It's Law
- 2025684842-4843 A Month with Smoking Law: Problems Resolved Smoothly
- 2025684844 Jonesville County Health Coalition Announces Introduction of Jonesville Smoking Law
- 2025684845-4847 Medical Association Head Endorses Nonsmokers' Rights Plan
- 2025684848-4854 Michael Schildberger Show Radio 310 Melbourne Australia Friday, 850726 9:10 A.M.
- Characteristic
- EXTR, EXTRA
- Date Loaded
- 23 May 1999
- UCSF Legacy ID
- gpc81f00
Document Images
b
}
THE
I SMOKING
POLICY
HANDBOOK
!
A Voluntary Program
Endorse+d' By:
Santa Ciarai County
Manufacturing Group
San Jose
Chamber of Commerce
City of' San Jose

This packa9e has been designed'to assist employers
in drafting a voluntary smoking policy for their
workpiace:
The flrst step:ns to read the "Guideiines for Estab-
lishing an Employer Srnokrng i Rohcy-" These suggest
both procedures and policy ideas you will want to
consider.
To heip you develop a survey of your empioyees'
attitudes about a smokirng, poi,cy, a sample form is
inctuded in this brochure Policy samples and ideas
are also included fon guidance in drafting your
osrvn document:.
In adtlrtion- a i summary of, San Jose city smoking
taws is IlSted. Although most regulations cover Smok-
ing, in public places. it is important for your policy to
be consistent with any applicable laws. If you feel thatt
one of these laws may apply to ypur, workpiat:e: you
tnay obtain the full text from the Crty Clerk's office
Finally, please Itt' us know whether or not you plan
to peepare a smoking policy or d you need additional
assistance. A coupon is included for this purpose.

M.::.L..~
I
STAT'EMENT
OF INTENT
FOR REGULATING SIIVIC}FICJNG
IN THE 1'XyORKPLACE IN' THE CITY
OF SAN JOSE '
There is growing opmlon rn both government and
private industry that it is desirable to deve/op~poticres
that address the need5 of smokers and nonsmokers in
the workplace
.
we be+ieve that a cooperative effon is' des'irablp to
bring about such policies in as many businesses as
possible throughout the City of San Jose
It is the intent of the City Council of San Jose to
encourage all employers to voluntarily adopt written
smoking policies based on speclfic guidelines The San
Jose Chamber of Commerce as weu''as the Santa
Clara County Manufacturing Group have offered to
ass7st'rnithrs' goal.
tt is the specific rntent' of the San Jose Crty Councrll
to assure'that the workplace accommodates the
needS of the nonsmoker
A'S Proposed'for adopt on on August 7. 1984: by San
Jose City Councn
GUIDELINES FOR
ESTABLISHING THE
S'MO'KINGPOLlCY
Planning and Development
SUPPOR'C To be successfU;. all levels of management.
must suppon the idea o6'a smoking policy ft must be
considered part of the company's personnerpolrcy
GOALS: Management ShouIQ7d determone' thee gpats 4
would like to achieve through a Smoking, policy A
umetable and budget Shoutd'be developed for the
project
COMMUNlCA7iION: It rs' essent;al for manageme.nt
to commun cate to all employees the com;,any s post-
uoni regArding, estabtshment of a smok,ng policy
Announce that'it rs' fr0anagement's'des+re to
establish a smoking policy
Exp{din why this action is beng,takeng for, example.
-To provide a mutually acceptable environment for
all employees
-To demonstrate that private employers are wrlrmg
to: take responsibility in thls area with'out, gpvern-
cnent mandate
-Irirvrte comments from employees There are several
ways to do thls. including phone or personal m5ter,
views and written questionnaires
The specific questions you ask-and certainty the
wording-will depend on the nature of'youri business
the extent to1whrch you'want employees involved in
the planning process. and the composition of your
workforee: e.g . whether employees are ma nty profes;
sional or cler,cai. wnether they have desk jp5s;
whether they work with customers. etc

A SAMPLE
SMOKING POLICY &
EMPLOYEE SURVEY
Sample Instructions
we are considering preparing a policy covering
smoking in our workplace
In recent'.yearst some cities haverelQulred~
emptoyers to prepare smokrng; policies We prefer a
v^oluntary, approach and we neediyour help to
decide whether a smokrng policy is desirable or
necessary
Please,take a few moments and answer these, ques-
tions Your answers are confldentlali When you"ve
frnrshed. please fold the, form im half so your answers
are inside Return the completed form to
Sample Questions
i
Ii What is your work area h'ke7 (check appropriate box)
CPnvate Office 0Open Bay Area OAssembty Line
CCub,des on Part trons CService Counter,
2 Db you think we need'a formal smoking policy in
our vvorkplace?
.
CYes CNo
3'. Wh0 should a smoking,polrty favor?
C The srnoker~ who wants to smoke 0 The
nonsmoker who wants smoke-free air C Don't care
4. Where should smoking be contro/ledP ' (check alt
that apply)
C Desk or work areas 0 Cafeterias or lunchrooms
C Break areas like employee lounges 0 Haawayss
and corridors C I Restrooms O Conference and'
meeting rooms',
5 If given the chorce. would youdesrgt+ate your
immediate work area for, your' des'k) as a: 0
Nonsmokrng area O1Smokrng i area ,
6. If' we adopt a pohcy. woufd you be waitrng to
relocate to an area designated either smoking or
nonsmoking?
CYes CNo
7 Dolyou smoke?
OYes CNo~
8 Please add any comments you care to make.
SMOKING POL1'C'lES
Hewlett' Packard
A mutually comfortable environment for HP
emp6oyees is' dependent' upon ithe thoughtfulness and
coopera0mn i of both smokers and non-smokers.
HP has a responsbinty to provide and ma!ntairn a
healthy and clean working, envrronment' It iS, mpor'
tant to note, that HP is not', requtredd nor rS 4' real!st ;
to provide a"smoke-free"envrronment Therefore. HP'
dbes nor, attempt to ban smoking enare:y Ratner v:e
hope to promote aniawareness of'the concern of
non-smokers among those whoidb smoke and to b°
responsive to the needs of those'who find close prox-
rmity to smoke objectionable
The following guidelines Strive to meet the needs
andidesaeS of'both STokerSand nonsmokerS
EMPLOYEES' RESPONS18IL1T1P,
As in many other aspects of' work. errnplbyrees need
to be sensrtlve and extend common courtesy to their'
fellow employees
I. Employees rnay desrgnate their immediate work
area. where practical. as "no smokrng"
2- Emplbyees who smoke shoutdido so primarily in
their own work areas and shoutd respect au! "no
smokrng;' designated i areas
MA1NAG'ERS' RESPONSIBILITY
The fouowing gurdelines are intended as, examples
of actions consistent with HP's pOhcy.
I Designation of "no smoking" areas with ,appro-
pnate signs These areas should include conference~
roorns: libraries., restrooms and medical care fac l ues.
2 Dining rooms and!cafeterias shoutd,have at least
half of the tables clearly marked i for "ho ~ smoking"
3 For those employees who have atterg-es on physical
reactions to tobacco smoke. managers should attempt
to make reasonable accommodatrons,
LEGAL REQUIREMENT'
These gwidelines will in no way supersede local or
state law. or any'exrstrng or future, regulations
estabtrshedi fpo fire- health on safety reasons.
CC-4

r
American Lung A'ssociatiom of
Santa Ciara-San Sientm Counties
Management recognizes that there is an over-
whelming body of evidence rnd;catingithe adverse
effects of indoor air pollutLorU particularly that caused
by tobacco smoke. on the health and physical com-
fon of employees in theworkplace As an expression
of'rts concern for the general w u being,ot all its
empioyees. and in an efforn to minimize these adverse
effects upon emptoyees: the touowrng guidelines are
establdshed All employees are requested to conform to
these guidelines
The basic premise usedirn estabtushing these
guidelines is that those employees who are adverselyy
affected by tobacco smoke are entit+edito a smoke-free
environm2nt' to work m, whenever and wherever that'
rs' poss9ble and prudent Legal and industrial
precedents exist' for such guidelines and policies
POLICY
I Employees may post their work areas as non"
smoking with appropriate signs Auiemployees are
expected to respect those signs
2' The cafeterias will prov,de separate smokrng i and
non-smokung sections
3 Smoking; Is prohibited in meetings and conference
rooms and such rooms shall be posted to thati effect.
4 Supervisors will make reasonable' eftorts' to accom;
modate a non-smokang ernptoyee'S request for a
smoke-free environment Examples of such reasonable
efforts are relocation of an employee within a larger
work area: taking prevailing air movement into
accounnl or changing occupants of, a shared office to
co-locate' non,smokers'
5. Smoking is prohibited in smattlcommunal work
areas (e g copy-machine rooms) , and' in restrooms.
6 Smoking rs prohibited by emptoyees rn entrance
lobbies
7' Supervisors may'designate areas under their control
as non-smoking areas. where such designation is
appropriate for reasons due to:safety cleanliness. p'ra
per operation of equipment or, inadequacy ot'
ventilatton
8 When reasonable accommodations of smokers and
non-smokers conflict where the company is rnvotved.
the rights ofi the non-srrlokeri S'houtd, prevaili
I
1 I
a
CC-5'.
OTHER COMPANY POLICIES
(Extracted from SMOKING AND THE VL!CJRKPLACE bv
the Natronal i Interagency Council on Smokang; and
Health. Fall' 19601
Companies are becoming more aware of the prob-
tems of smokrng at the workplace and of the nec-C to
address the issue Some have extendeo nc-smok,ng,
policies to offices and other work areas. as well as
common areassuCh as.lunchrooms:s conference'
rooms: and hallways Here are some exp-r,aies
NO-SMOKING SECTIONS AT MEETINGS
AII meeting rooms at the New York City offices of
Sears Roebuck and'Co have srnokingiand no-smok:ng
sections Arcording to WY+nfield Frrman personnel
director. "employees have, responded gratefuu'y, to
thrs"'Some nonsmokers have,asked the com,oany to
go4urther Nonsmokers have signs on their desk Say-
rng. "Tnank you, for not smokang "
RESPONSE TO EMPLOYEE REOUESTS
The "Your Vrev,v" column of the employee pub~~~~ca"
tion of The' Travelers Insurance Companies in Hartford '
received manly'letters frominonsmlokers asking that
smoking prrviteges be limited in some way The corn-
pany"3 response was toJ,rna smoking where practical.
in areas where air' movement is rilrnoma!. or, rin con-
fined areas where smoke rnay cause discomfort to
nonsmokers'regardless of air crrculatron, Two tunch-
rooms' have been set aside for nonsmokers: and smok-
ing has been prohibited in the auditorium and
classrooms
-
UMITING THE SOURCE
New England Mutual Life Insurance Co announced
recently that cigarette vendmg imachines wOuld be
removed from its home office in Boston and tobacco
products would no longer be sold'+n the NEL store,
Also, signs requestrng ino smoking in the presence of
nonsmokers will be placed in all meeting and
conference rooms
Smoking witl conunue to be permrtted. however.
where no-smoking signs do not appear. but smokers'
are asked to, give consideration to the comfort and
health of nonsmokers: The company feels that this
policy is appropriate. in vrew'of ttrnew insurance
policy series whrch offers nonsmokers lolwer rates
SPECIAL RULES FORISPECIAL INDUSTRIES
Whether or not employees . are atlo;wedd tosmoke'
may depend on the kand of industry they're working
in Wmat's good for a factory manufactur ng asbestos
products may not be right for an off ce supplies firm
Wzrenouse workers don't usualfly need to conform toN
.
trne sam= publ c contact standards that retad clerks dco
Here are some d fferences we found in sTOokrng, rules N
,n varnous industrres:. ~~
In factones., smoking is usuatly, prohibitediforreasonV.lr ofl safely andror product purity
Manufacturers and pre~
~.
rA
~
GZl
Q'

i
cessors of' food products are especially strict Smoking
is allowed av one cornpany only at certain times in
specified areas smoking rooms: lounges. tocker rooms.
cafeterias during lunch hour, favatones: maintenance
shop. and the boiler room At another, smoking ,s not
permrrted i im (he plant. except in designated areas
Restricted areas include all food'production. paper
conversron. and'raw matenalland finished goods
storage areas
Insurance, companiesl banks, retail stores. and'other
customer-deperndent industries often ban Smoking in
af public contact areas Examples Smoking permitted
only in private off;cess cafeteria., and meeting rooms.
Smoking not, atfowedirn the lobby. restrooms&
haloways: efevators: nosmokrngiarea of'the cafeteria
or any other area where' a''"np-SmOkrng'' sign is
posted Smokong, allovnyed only at', desks' or, in the
tounge. no smokrngiin the cafeteria. restrooms. halls.
elevators "In iconsideratiorn of eustomera and fettoww
workers;' no smoking dunng working hours:except rn
private offices. restrooms: or lunchrooms
OTHER SOLUTIONS
Place rearrangement
The ideal solution is to have separate offices or
oKrce areas for smokers and nonsmokers If that rsnlt
possible. try to rearrange seaung iso that smokers and'
nonsmokers' donlt s4 next to each other Be sure that
the nonsmokers are seated in an area where the air
flow won't bring the smoke toward'them.
If separate areas are impossible. consider erecting
phys cat barriers between a, smoken and'a nonsmoker:
wails, parrtrtions, or high furniture~
Even if smoking is allowed at, w4Drkplace5, consider
banning it in conference rtX7ms' and'other smatl
enc!osed I areas
Time rearrangement
Ask smokers to limit their smoking! Telt' nonsmokers
to speak up if the smoke gets to be too, much for
them:, most smokers will be reasonable,
1f'ypur'lunchroom is too smallito allow for a
satisfactory nonsmoking sectton, perhaps you couldl
schedule one lunch period fornonsmokers onfy
Preferably it would be the first one, before the room
fills with smoke
MIscellaneous
Provide ''smokeless ashtrays." which are available in'
most drug, and discount, stores Placed on the desk of
a smoker. they are'supposed to trap the smoke and
keep m from drifting out of the immed ate area
Remrnd smokers not to leave cigarettes burrnng in
ashtrays Provide the kind of ashtrays that open and
ctbse: so tharbutts and ashes can be crn,reredland the
o'dor, held in check
Ban smok ng at meet ngs if one of the participants
ob)ecIs. A.vote could be taken, a:t'.eachmeet+ng,and if
no one mmds- smoking would be, permitted
I
n
ORDINANCES
Ordinances in the City of San Jose prcn,t)a smokjng
in the following areas
RESTiAURANTS
A contiguous (adjacent areas( nosmoking area of
not less than thirty percent (309fi(, shatr be providead
within.all indoor eat-ng,estabtishments w.i;h arnoccupied capacity of one hundred'(tppj or more
per
sons The no-sRmokung area may be increased to meet
customer demand' The person greeting;tnezustomer
is required to ask each patromfor his or' her preference
upon arrival Banquet rooms for private functions,
cocktail lounges and bars are'not affeCtediby.'the
ordinance
RETAIL STORES
Withm atl retail stores doing business with the'
general public Store areas not open to lthe general
public and retail tobacco:shops are not affected
HEALTH FACILITIES
Within all publrcareas and bed space areas used by
two or more patients in an public or private hosp,ta's
and health facUrt es A patient is permitted to smoke if
assigrned lto a bed space area occupied solely byy
smokers Smoking by non-patients is permossable onlyy
in specratly desugnated'smoktng areas.
THEATERS.
Within alntheaters orotherencrosed areas pr man,y
used for any motion pccture. stage dramai musical
recttal, lecture, athletic event. ctosed circuit TV or
other performance: open i to the general public Per-
formers are permitted to smoke when smok ng rs a
part of the performance Theaters sennng, fbod or
where alcoholic beverages are, served are covered by
the Restauranc section of this ordinance Movre theater
must indicate on the screen prior to each screeningi
that smoking is prohibited
.
PUBLIC MEETINGS
Within any meeting open to the genera' public
that is conducted by any elected or appointed person
or body
ELEVATORS'
Within elevators, generally used by and open to
the pubtic
SIGN POSTING
easdy seen "No~Smokmg" signs shau,be poste:1 n
areas where smok ng is prohibited and in ithe lobby if
there is one
PENALTY'
Failure to post a sign or to give notice as requrred.
Or know+nglysmokingrn violation ofthe'ordnance: iS~
an infraction punishable by a fine of, not more than
fdty dorlars (S50 t7©1
.
CC-6

THE NEXT S'TEP'
tS YOURS'
Wp rcnv,te your participation in thls w<orthrNhde
voluntary effort and encourage you to begon consid-
eratson of a smokrng,poticy for your organization
Ouesuons regarding this program should be directed
to the ofGces ~ irsted below.
Wt would appreaate, hearing atrout your plans with respect to the adoption of a smokrng poucy
Please complete and return the adjacent coupon at
your earliest convenrence
Santa Clara County Manufacturing Group:
12 South First Streer: Suite 1220
San Jose. California 95113
(408j 19478300
San Jose Ctu.mber of Commerce
One Paseo de San Antonio
San Jose. Californa :95113
(408) 998-7000
American Lung; Association of Santa iClara-
San Benito Counties
1469 Park Avenue
San Jose. Caiifornia 95126
(408) 998,5864
.
CC-7

Cc-s
