Would the anti-smoking ban affect the strategies of a restaurant - Essay Example

Bans on smoking in restaurants and bars are appearing increasingly in many European countries, like Ireland (2004), Italy (2005), Sweden (2005), Norway (2004), and introduction is expected in many more in the near future (Rosted, 2006, p.34-9). In the U.S. many states have enacted a complete smoking ban in all restaurants and bars including: California, Delaware, New Jersey, New York, Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Utah, Vermont, Washington and Montana. Proponents of smoke-free restaurants cite a number of reasons to bar smoking in dining establishments.

First, reduction of carbon monoxide, a contaminant present in tobacco smoke. An increased level of carbon monoxide has been shown to cause headache, chest pain, alteration of blood pressure and nausea (Steenland, 1992, p.48-54). Medical research demonstrates that second-hand tobacco smoke causes 35,000 to 40,000 excess deaths from heart disease per year in the U.S. alone. As a Gallup Poll shows, 52 percent of Americans believe second-hand smoke is "very harmful." The New York Department of Health found in a 2004 study that air pollution levels had decreased sixfold in bars and restaurants after the ban went into effect.

The study also found that 97 percent of the more than 22,000 establishments inspected by the city from April 2003 through February were found in compliance with the new law and that 150,000 New Yorkers reported less exposure to second-hand smoke in their workplaces since the ban took effect (Zagat, 2004, p.43-6). Citizens of Helena, Mont. voted to ban smoking in all public places. Six months later the state Legislature rescinded the ban. During the six month ban, heart attack rates dropped by 58 percent.

Once the ban was lifted, the heart-attack rate went back to previous levels (US Department of Health and Human Services, 2000, p.132). Another example: a study of Norway's 2004 smoke-free workplace law in bars, restaurants and night clubs has proven the law to be a huge success with staff breathing improved, nicotine in their urine eliminated and air quality has been cleaned up (Rosted, 2006, p.88-96). The thought of more smoke-free restaurants seems to be attracting patrons. A study in New York reports that 96 percent of those surveyed are dining out "as often" or "more often" since a smoke-free dining ban was established.

What's more, restaurant openings outnumbered closings by a 2-1 ratio (Zagat, 2004, p.52-6).Second, the smoking ban results in a multitude of benefits for the management and safety of the restaurant, including decreasing the sick time of employees, limited liability of harm to employees, and decreased risk of fire hazards. It provides a healthier environment in the restaurant and decreases sick time of employees bothered by colds, sinus problems, asthma, and other respiratory problems triggered by second-hand smoke exposure.

The law cuts the maintenance costs by eliminating burns to carpets, booths, tables and other furnishings. Smoking ban gets rid of dirty ashtrays and ashes and butts on the floor. It keeps the restaurant's owners from worrying that bread and pastries will pick up smoke odour. The law does away with complaints from non-smokers bothered by the smoke in the establishment. It makes seating easier: the restaurant's employees won't have to worry about putting customers in the