Adam Cooper

1. Employers should have the right to ban or to restrict smoking by their employees at the workplace because of the effects of secondhand smoke on the other employees. In addition, the costs to the employer for covering health insurance are increasing because of the damage caused by smoking. More than 50,000 nonsmoker deaths occur in the United States each year and the numbers would likely stay high for the future if employees were allowed to smoke at the workplace. Allowing smoking at work puts other workers at risk and damages a healthy work environment. Private companies are allowed to set the rules of the workplace so it is up to the company to decide whether to allow smoking or to ban it. By banning smoking it may also show that the company promotes a healthier lifestyle and seeks a cleaner workplace. 2. Employers should also have the right to ban or to restrict smoking by employees off the job because of the rising insurance costs. Smokers on average cost their employers $1,800 more per year in health care costs, which is a cost employers would be motivated to eliminate. The company can make the decision to eliminate smoking, while the employee has the freedom to make their own lifestyle choices. The company has the right to hire any individual that the company chooses to whether it is somebody who smokes or not. Trying to “promote a culture of wellness” is a top priority for some employers such as Geisinger Health System and that includes hiring individuals who do not smoke. 3. I think that the government should not have to regulate smoking at work but should encourage employers to ban it and give incentives to those firms that do ban smoking. The government could possibly create a policy that gives tax breaks or even deposit health care funds in accounts of those companies that ban smoking. This policy would not force the government to be directly involved but rather motivate the employer to make restrictions on smoking. 4. Multinational firms should have a single corporate policy on smoking in the workplace no matter what the local laws are or the norms of behavior in the various countries that the firm does business in. Changing the law depending on where the company is located would be confusing for the workers that travel and would not bring consistency with respect to the company policy. Encouraging life style changes and putting health first throughout the world shows that the firm is serious about the smoking issue and serious about protecting its workers. Although smoking is more prevalent in other parts of the world, a multinational firm should not change its policy to accommodate an increase in active smokers in that area. Allowing smoking will still effect the healthy lifespan of its employees and put others at risk through second hand smoke.