Bad Logic: Protecting Workers

Claims:
This ordinance is needed to protect workers.
Workers have a right to work in a non-life-threatening environment.

Let's ignore the fact that the hospitality industry has one of the highest turnover rates of any industry, dispelling the myth that these workers are somehow "trapped".

Ask the workers. We have. They don't want this ban. The overwhelming majority of them are smokers, themselves.

Most of the workers in food service in Northern Kentucky, especially in bars, will tell you that the Ohio smoking ban has caused a boom in their business and in their wallets, and they are against a ban because it will negatively effect their take-home pay. In fact, some of these workers were formerly employed in Ohio.

All workers have the same rights. They have the choice to work wherever they choose. A place of business may make the choice to become smoke-free. The business owner made the decision that the free market made the company better able to obtain and retain quality employees. The free market is working. More than 2/3rds of restaurants are already smoke-free by choice.

But to give the free-market a kick-start, we provide a plan to rectify any current employment of a non-smoker who feels "forced" to stay in their current job, known as Employee Choice.

Some people work in high-stress environments. Some sit at a desk with no physical activity. Some work with large equipment that could crush them. Some work in nuclear power plants, where one mistake could be disastrous. Some work on interstates with vehicles passing by at 65MPH. Some work on the top of bridges, stadiums, and other structures, where one misstep could have them falling to their death.

Without a ban, some bars and restaurants will always allow smoking; but there are still offices in Kentucky that allow smoking indoors, and there are still bars in Ohio that allow smoking, despite the law. (Some of our members have met in a smoke-easy).