Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
" (Montini, Bero, 2008)
During their research, Montini and Bero spoke with many bar owners and discussed the problem of compliance with the law. They found that generally they all wanted to comply because compliance meant no fines and bars had very slim margin of profits which meant they did not want to owe any money to the agencies. But they complained of "level playing field" issue. For a restaurant owner, the same problem may arise. Since there is no level playing field, compliance can be hindered. Not all restaurants in the vicinity of this restaurant would want to comply with this law and those who don't are likely to cause fewer problems for their customers. This meant customers have an option available if smoking ban is too strict at one restaurant. However, if all restaurant owners sit together and decide in favor of compliance then customers will have no choice but to follow the law.
"In order to protect their individual business interests, bar owners had to work collectively in unanimously complying with or unanimously ignoring the law. The slim profit margins at stake increased the focus on, and the salience of, even and consistently maintained enforcement so that no bar was at a competitive disadvantage. No amount of local discretion was going to provide...
For one, it costs the owner some money in fines, and secondly, it also causes problems for non-smoking customers. They may have chosen this restaurant because of its no-smoking policy but seeing other customers smoke can make the question owner's understanding of and regard for law.
What can be even more frustrating for owners is the lack of responsibility placed on customer for his behavior. If a customer chooses to ignore the sign, shouldn't he be held responsible and shouldn't he have to pay the fine as well. It seems that government seems to overlook this aspect of the compliance issue. The customers who choose to ignore the sign should be made to pay and this will facilitate compliance. The sign should be followed by a warning about fines for violators of law. Compliance should not be the sole responsibility of the owner.
References
Theresa Montini and Lisa A Bero. Implementation of a workplace smoking ban in bars: The limits of local discretion. BMC Public Health 2008, 8:402
Smoking Ban Tobacco smoke should certainly be considered a toxic chemical, and its risks to human health have been well-known for decades. Any reasonable person -- or indeed anyone who is even slightly familiar with the medical and scientific evidence -- would certainly know this today. Forty years ago, the federal government banned tobacco advertising from radio and television and put warning labels on tobacco products, while class action lawsuits have
Some states like New York and California have banned smoking in bars and restaurants and in outdoor public places such as parks (Harris, 2012). That also makes a lot of sense because when customers sit next to smokers, they have no choice but to inhale their smoke. Various smokers' rights groups have objected to these types of bans and complained that their rights are being interfered with (Harris, 2012). It
Refutation of Counterargument: James Repace, is a former senior science policy analyst who worked at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Occupational Safety & Health Administration (OSHA) for 19 years and as a research physicist at the Naval Research Laboratory for 11 years. According to Repace, OSHA first proposed regulating secondhand smoke as a workplace hazard after determining that it caused as many as 14,000 worker deaths annually, far surpassing any other toxic
Bar and restaurant owners also contend they have the right to set the terms of their employment, and to create a particular atmosphere in their restaurants -- including a sophisticated or seedy image that allows for smoking. However, foot traffic at restaurants and bars actually rose after the ban went into effect (Rutenberg & Koppel 2005, p.1). Even one smoker admitted he was converted to a non-smoking atmosphere, saying now:
BANS ON SMOKING IN AMERICAN CITIES: NEW YORK CITY & LOS ANGELES Public Health Moving with unexpected swiftness, New York state lawmakers passed a sweeping anti-smoking measure that makes New York the third state after California and Delaware to ban smoking in all workplaces, including restaurants, bars, and hotels. Within hours of the New York bill's passage, Governor George E. Pataki signed the tough measure, which exempts only America-Indian-owned casinos, cigar bars
Banning Smoking in Cars With Children: Moral and Legal Issues Five states in America, Arkansas, California, Louisiana, Maine and Oregon, and also Puerto Rico -- have made it a crime to smoke in cars when children are there, and more states are considering the adoption of this legislation as well. For instance, other nations such as Canada, South Africa and the United Arab Emirates are also leaning towards such a ban.