Smoking in workplace a "liability’

Press, 10 March 1987, Page 24

Smoking in workplace a "liability’

NZPA-AAP Melbourne A visiting American law professor has warned Australian employers that allowing smoking in the workplace could cost them hundreds of thousands of dollars. Professor John Banzhaf said Australian law was set up to follow the American example, and take test cases on nonsmokers’ rights to court. The result was likely to be the same as in the United States — fines and workers’ compensation claims which had turned smoke-filled workplaces into a huge liability for American companies. Professor Banzhaf, who founded the American organisation Action on Smoking and Health (A.S.H.), told AAP that environments which forced non-smokers to breath tobacco could be attacked on three legal grounds: • Employers and many other businesses, such as airlines, had an obligation to provide a safe and healthy environment — recent reports from the United States’ surgeongeneral and the United States National Academy of Science had proved non-smokers contracted lung cancer from breath-

ing tobacco smoke. • Employers had an obligation to make reasonable provision for disabled people, including those who suffered from asthma, those who were particularly sensitive to smoke or had respiratory problems. • Workers compensation legislation might require employers to pay for injuries suffered on the job. “Non-smokers who are forced to breath tobacco smoke are in exactly the same position as workers forced to breath asbestos or poisonous gases,” Professor Banzhaf said. A.S.H. in the United States had taken successful cases against employers, unions, and businesses such as airlines for violating these laws. “People are realising \the enormous cost of smoking — to their pocketbooks and to their status," he said. “Transport employers limit worker drinking, fire and police set physical standards which dictate diet and exercise, many companies have rules on drugs. “Employers see what smoking can cost them in taxes, health insurance and compensation, as well as through the courts.”