Smoke-free Bars
Background
There is now significant scientific evidence that smoking and exposure to secondhand smoke causes life-threatening diseases. Tobacco is responsible for over 400,000 deaths in the United States annually, of which 53,000 are the result of secondhand smoke exposure (7, 6, 9). Bar and restaurant employees have been shown to have particularly high levels of exposure to secondhand smoke, which has been linked to an increased risk of lung cancer among food service workers (14). The level of secondhand smoke in bars is typically 390-610% higher than in offices that allow smoking (14).
Although many workplaces are now smoke-free, hospitality industry workers still suffer the greatest exposure to secondhand smoke of any occupational sector (13). Despite the high level of exposure to this occupational health hazard, many local governments have been reluctant to protect bar and restaurant workers. Tobacco companies have vigorously opposed such laws, arguing that smoke-free policies will result in economic hardship for bar and restaurant owners. However, smoke-free policies are not only beneficial for the health of patrons and employees, but are shown to have either no effect or a measurably positive effect on hospitality sales and jobs (12).
Policies
Pass local ordinance or state laws creating smoke-free bars.
To completely eliminate secondhand smoke exposure among nonsmokers, bars must be smoke-free. Six states and more than 120 local communities have laws requiring bars to be completely smoke-free (2). The law with the longest history is California's Smoke-Free Workplace Law (also known as Labor Code 6404.5), which prohibits smoking in all enclosed places of employment, including bars (2). Before the passage of the California Smoke-Free Workplace Law, in 1990, only 35% of California workers were protected from secondhand smoke. In 2000, more than 90% were protected. As a result, more than 800,000 employees working in bars, entertainment venues, card rooms, bingo parlors, and bowling alleys are guaranteed a smoke-free workplace (1).
Encourage local bars to voluntarily adopt a smoke-free policy.
Bar owners do not have to wait for their local or state government to enact a law requiring their establishments to be smoke-free. Bars may voluntarily become smoke-free establishments to protect the health of their employees and patrons. Seventy-five percent of bar patrons do not smoke in bars, and one poll found that up to 70% of Americans regularly avoid bars because they do not want their hair and clothes to smell like smoke (4). By implementing smoke-free policies and thus targeting the majority of consumers, bar owners may find that such policies can be beneficial for business.
Effectiveness Data
As a result of 90% compliance with the Smoke-Free Workplace Law among bars in California, bartenders showed significant respiratory health improvement and increased lung function less than two months after the statewide smoke-free bar law was implemented in 1998 (5). In Delaware and Boston, tests of indoor air quality in hospitality venues before and after the implementation of smoke-free air laws, which included bars, found that fine particle air pollution and carcinogen levels dropped by 90-95% when the venues became smoke-free (11).
Smoke-free ordinances are not associated with adverse economic consequences affecting hospitality venues, including bars, according to several credible, peer-reviewed studies that looked at impartial sales tax data (12). In El Paso, Texas, total restaurant and bar revenues did not decline after the city implemented a smoke-free restaurant and bar law in January of 2002 (8).
In both California and New York City, the number of people working in the hospitality industry increased after the implementation of smoke-free bar laws. In California, after the passage of the Smoke-free Bars Act in 1998, employment at eating and drinking establishments increased by 56,000 between 1998 and 2000. This is compared to growth of 29,000 between 1996 and 1998, and growth of 46,000 between 1994 and 1996. The rate of job growth in the eating and drinking establishment industry in California grew faster than the overall job growth rate for the state during the same period (19.5% vs. 13.5%) (4, 10).
According to a 2000 survey commissioned by the California State Department of Health Services, of 1,020 bar patrons, 73% favored a smoking ban in bars, up from 59% in August 1998. The survey also found that 56% of the people surveyed would be more apt to visit a smoke-free bar or that it made no difference (4). Likewise, an analysis of a representative sample of Massachusetts adults suggests that smoke-free policies are likely to increase overall patronage of restaurants and bars. Contrary to tobacco industry assertions, smokers are no more likely than nonsmokers to be frequent restaurant or bar users (3).
Contacts
Americans for Nonsmokers' Rights (ANR)
2530 San Pablo Avenue, Suite J
Berkeley, CA 94702
Phone: (510) 841-3032
Fax: (510)841-3071
Email: anr@no-smoke.org
Website: http://www.no-smoke.org
BREATH - The California Smoke-free Bar Program
5495 Carlson Drive, Suite D
Sacramento, California, 95819
Phone: (916) 739-8925
E-mail: breath@jps.net
Web site: http://www.breath-ala.org
Tobacco Control Section of the California Department of Health Services
601 North 7th St., MS 555
PO Box 942732, Sacramento, California
Phone: (916) 445-2563
Fax: (916)327-5424
E-mail: goliva@dhs.ca.gov
References
- American Lung Association. (1998). Smoke-free Workplace Law Means Californians Continue to Breathe Easier - Bars are Healthier and Safer Work Environments. Accessible at: http://www.californialung.org/press/981229smokefree.html
- Americans for Nonsmokers' Rights. (2004, January). Municipalities with 100% Smoke-free Ordinances. Available online at http://www.no-smoke.org/100ordlisttabs.pdf
- Biener, L. & Siegel, M. (1997). Behavior Intentions of the Public After Bans on Smoking in Restaurants and Bars. American Journal of Public Health, 87: 2042-2044.
- California Department of Health Services. (2001) What Really Happened in California. Slideshow available at http://www.tobaccoscam.ucsf.edu/pdf/9.7-CalDHSPresentation.ppt
- Eisner, M., Smith, A. & Blanc, P. (1998, December). Bartenders' Respiratory Health After Establishment of Smoke-free Bars and Taverns. Journal of the American Medical Association, 280: 1909-1914.
- Environmental Protection Agency. (1993). Respiratory Health Effects of Passive Smoking: Lung Cancer and Other Disorders. Available online at: http://www.epa.gov/iaq/pubs/etsfs.html.
- Glantz, S & Parmley, W. (1991). Passive Smoking and Health Disease: Epidemiology, Physiology, and Biochemistry. Circulation, 83(1):1-12.
- Huang, P. (2004, February). Impact of a smoking ban on restaurant and bar revenues - El Paso, Texas, 2002. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 53(7): 150-152.
- National Cancer Institute. (1999). Health Effects of Exposure to Environmental Tobacco Smoke: The Report of the California Environmental Protection Agency. Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph, 10. Available at: http://cancercontrol.cancer.gov/tcrb/monographs/10
- New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, Office of Communications. (2003, July 23). Employment Up in City Bars and Restaurants Since Implementation of the Smoke-Free Air Act. Available at: http://nyc.gov/html/doh/html/public/press03/pr081-0723.html
- Repace, J. (2003, February). An Air quality survey of respirable particles and particulate carcinogens in Delaware hospitality venues before and after a smoking ban. Available at: http://www.tobaccoscam.ucsf.edu/pdf/RepaceDelaware.pdf
- Scollo, M. & Lal, A. (2001, November). Summary of Studies Assessing the Economic Impact of Smoke-Free Policies in the Hospitality Industry. Vic Center for Tobacco Control, Anti-Cancer Council of Victoria. Available online at: http://www.vctc.au/tc-res/Hospitalitysummary.pdf
- Shopland, D., Anderson, D., Burns, D. & Gerlach, K. (2004, April). Disparities in Smoke-Free Workplace Policies Among Food Service Workers. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 46(4).
- Siegel, M. (1993). Involuntary Smoking in the Restaurant Workplace: A Review of Employee Exposure and Health Effects. Journal of the American Medical Association, 270: 490-493.
Acknowledgements
Cynthia Hallet, MPH, Executive Director, Americans for Nonsmokers' Rights, Berkeley, CA
Dian Kiser, M.S., CFRE, Co-Director, BREATH, American Lung Association – East Bay, Sacramento, CA
The Center for Health Improvement also acknowledges the following reviewers for providing comments on the original version of this policy profile:
Michael P. Eriksen, Sc.D., Former Director, Office of Smoking on Health, Centers for Disease Control, Atlanta, GA
David Fleming, M.D., Former State Epidemiologist, Oregon Health Division, Portland, OR
Sally Herndon-Malek, Former Director, Project ASSIST, DHHS, Raleigh, NC
Philip Huang, M.D., M.P.H.,Chief, Bureau for Disease and Injury Prevention, Texas Department of Health, Austin, TX
Kevin Keane, Director, Federal Legislative Advocacy, American Cancer Society, California Division, Sacramento, CA
Jon Lloyd, Director, Tobacco Control Program, Planning and Policy, California Department of Health Services, Sacramento, CA
Paul Minicucci, Former Executive Director, California Next Generation Tobacco Control Alliance, Sacramento, CA
Jane Pritzl, Former Field Director, Assist Project, Division of Prevention Programs, Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, Colorado, UT
Randy Schwartz, American Cancer Society, New England
Updated 6/30/04
