|
Comprehensive smoke-free policies are good for health and good for business. They clear the air ofcancer-causing
<br />chemicals and encourage people who smoke to quit, improving health and decreasing health care costs. In addition,
<br />there is a growing body of economic research that reaches the same conclusion: smoke-free policies do not have an
<br />adverse economic impact on the hospitality industry.'
<br />Smake-free policies decrease health care costs and increase worker productivity
<br />by helping people quit smoking or smoke less, and by reducing people's exposure
<br />to secondhand smoke.
<br />DECREASED EMPLOYEE CIGARETTE CONSUMPTION
<br />• Smoke-free workplaces reduce total cigarette
<br />consumption per employee by 29 percent.'
<br />DECREASED HEALTH CARE COSTS
<br />• Secondhand smoke costs more than $9.5
<br />billion each year in the United States in direct
<br />and indirect medical costs.'
<br />INCREASED WORKER PRODUCTIVITY
<br />• Cigarette smoking and exposure to
<br />secondhand smoke cost $92 billion
<br />a year in productivity losses.°
<br />Employees who smoke have twice the lost
<br />production time per week for personal health
<br />reasons than workers who never smoked-at
<br />a cost of $27 billion to U.S. employers.b
<br />INCREASED PROFITS
<br />In 2006, the
<br />United States Surgeon
<br />General reported that smoke-
<br />free policies and regulations do
<br />not have an adverse economic impact
<br />on the hospitality industry. Based
<br />on the evidence from peer-reviewed
<br />studies, the finding was part of the most
<br />comprehensive scientific report ever
<br />produced on the health harms of
<br />secondhand smoke-the first
<br />Surgeon General's report on
<br />secondhand smoke since
<br />1986.1
<br />• Business tax receipts for New York City restaurants and bars increased 8.7 percent from April 1, 2003, to
<br />January 31, 2004 (after implementation of a smoke-free law), compared to the same period in 2002-2003.6
<br />• A study of U.S. restaurant sales showed a median increase of 16 percent in the sale price of a restaurant
<br />covered by a smoke-free law compared to a similar restaurant in a community without such a law.'
<br />INCREASED OVERALL EMPLOYMENT
<br />• Despite New York City's smoke-free law going into effect on March 30, 2003, 164,000 people on
<br />average worked in city bars and restaurants during the year-the highest number recorded in at least
<br />a decade. In fact, in the nine months following the law's enactment, bars and restaurants gained
<br />10,600 jobs.b
<br />• Bars and restaurants in California had 218,300 more jobs in 2005 than in 1995, before a statewide
<br />smoke-free policy was implemented.e
<br />II I in~~`, ~u , :.,h hr_~. ~ :I~ JL,, i.~ r. ..i= ~ I Iltu'; it I. ~ _ -i~'I~!i ~ , ;,~. li'i„iiI~IN II+:~~!l ryur '~-i ~(~
<br />~ f t L ;~.b1 'J Htc~ r ~., .r~., ;rioV, I n, . =a-ai .i ~.dbd 9)fi7.
<br />~u~r,.n t.b` .~ ~ ~ ~. ~ i.. i .._.,.
<br />ti a .v~,idP ~ .1n~~1~ u ~ ir~b .~ . ,~,n_ i i ~Lf iir. i Jn~~.u~~ i~l. .Ina; I r.. '~ Lt ~. [90:..
<br />ii ,I.I ira ~ - it i ii. n;. ui~ ii,ui:.,i ~,. ,.G,.,~dii,:n '~:~n ~, ~ I .. n,i i~l t. =li.;i .: ~__...
<br />~' ,Ii.t ,i ;id f~.. ~ .~.. 'tsil 1 I.`-Hi',fli E9n'I,r ~~.0'I F'i,.. - Irl I _.i;:l ~. ii!A
<br />i; t t1l I. E: ire. i ~ ! I'l~~ i, i:il ,i ... ~ ~ I ~ -. ~ .. Fv1.P M,~.I ! X~II I ~. Z!1!~~,
<br />
|