The Smoking Climate
The Implementing of the Toronto by-law on
smoking In the-workplace was far from the Dist
time the Personnel Managers had been re-
qUIFed to deal with the Issue. The secondhand
smoke problem, the one non-smokers are most
concerned about (though odour bothers them
as well), had been causing conflict for some
years. Dividing offices along smoking lines had
been Ineffective, as had buying Ecologizers for
smokers. Both approaches had been widely
tried. as had offering Smokenders.
The by-law had largely solved the conflict.
bul had created two Issues of Ns awn. There
was no problem with compliance, but loss of
productivity was occurring, For one. smokers
were taking upwards of an hour a day lot smo-
king breaks, something the Personnel Mona.
gets tolerated as a hopefully passing phase.
The other was resentment by non-smokers at
he way smokers can take liberties with time
that non-smokers cannot. That. Plus complaints
about Increased smoking In lounges and cafe-
terias. caused continuing pressure from non-
smokers to take further action.
The Personnel Managers could foresee the
day when they might have to ban smoking
entirely, though that wasn't their goal per se,
The elimination of conflict was the goal. Some
firms had gone to the extent of Installing costly
air purification equipment to Improve the air
quality In the remaining designated smoking
areas. to try to keep the peace. Smokers In
Toronto face an Increasingly hostile climate.
Smoking In public. once an assumed right, Is
now an uncemain privilege. The singles at least
could smoke at home without need for consci-
ence. The marrieds, especially those who were
the only smokers In their household, had self-
Imposed or famfly-Imposed restrictions on smo-
king at home too.
The workplace by-laws had not been reacted
to by smokers as negatively as one might have
expected. For one thing, they yielded a forced
economy. For another, the smokers readily
admitted to quite freely taking smoking breaks.
Few really wanted to reinstate smoking at their
desk, and none seemed motivated to become
activists for their cause.
Unexpectedly, the non-smokers who had
never smoked were notably less tolerant of
smoking than were the former smokers. This
was especially true of the women who had
never smoked: they were easily the most rigidly
anil-smoking of all. with male former smokers
being the most empathetIc.
Excessive smoking breaks caused resent-
ment among the non-smokers. as did smoke
buRd-up In designated smoking areas. As ex-
pected, their main Issue was secondhand
smoke, an assumed health hazard. plus odour.
The most militant. largely women. objected to
merely being In proximity to smoking.
Air Purification Concepts
Small air cleaners were nothing new. The
Philips Ecologizer has been around for years.
but was considered Ineffective. For that reason,
there was much scepticism about the efficacy
of small Freestanding units. However, the
Smoke Magnet concept, promising 'electrosta-
tic'operatlon. sounded like It might really work.
The Interest In It among the smokers was for
home use. and among non-smokers. to help
clean the -P;r In designated smoking areas.
There was little or no belief among the smok-
ers, or open-mindedness among the non-smok-
ers, that any such device could turn back the
clock on workplace regulations at this tooAato
date. Non-smokers saw the by4aws as Impor-
tant social progress, and perceptually regres-
sing on ft was unacceptable. At best, such a
device could forestall or make unnecessary the
eventual total banning of smoking In the work-
place. The Personnel Managers were In favour
of this objective. and encouraged the develop-
ment of devices that could truly help. They did
not want to take unnecessarily harsh measures,
bul did want to be responsive to the needs of
(NC.
L/J
BATCo document for Province of British Columbia 16 April 1999

both sides. The Investment that many of the
firms represented had already made In special
ventilation equipment was testimony to this.
The Smoke Stak concept was just an object
of humour. The smokers rejected It as an un-
natural way to smoke. The non-smokers doubt-
ed smokers would use h faithfully, and even If
they did. sidestream and odour would still be
released. It was assumed such a device could
only be partially effective. Some exhaled smoke
was expected to be released as well.
The wall panel Smoke Magnet concept
wodd allow smoke to circulate In the air before
being trapped, unlike a device In Immediate
proximity to the source of the smoke. For that
reason, It was not favoured for either home or
office use. However. as an unobtrusive passive
device In restaurants, and especially In typically
smoky bars, it might alleviate the recirculation
problem. Evolving ways of forestalling stricter
by-laws about smoking In restaurants and bars
would likely be desirable. Increased strictness
was seen as Inevitable In the longer term. As I
Is. non-smokers conWer separate sections
alone to be an Inadequate schAlon,
A similar device for commercial aircraft was
fairly acceptable to non-smokers. I used In a
separate smoking section. Naturally, the smok
ers who flew were much In favour. Still, It was
seriously doubted that airlines would now back-
track, having come this far. The social progress
regression aspect aside, one anticipated airline
reason for reluctance was concern that It would
also reintroduce flre hazard.
Product Modifications
Reduced sIdestrearn was fairly appealing to and peripheral pleasures of smoking, replacing
the smokers. It promised to alleviate at least them with a bluntly pleasureless means of sat-
one objection. albeit a minor one, at theorell- IsfyIng an addiction. The srNkets would much
catly no penalty to themselves. The non-smok- rather not smoke in restricted areas than use a
ers saw reduced sidestream as mere tokenism. product like this. They saw Essence as a smok-
It would not affect secondhand smoke. and Ing peqsatlo@i aid. To the non-smokers, Essence
would likely have little Impact on odour. This was hilarious. If smokers really were prepared
concept would do more for the smooker's con- to use such a thing, lew non-smokers wow
science than anything else, but It could easily care, but they doubled smokers would want to
have appeal for that reason alone, especially I seem so foolish and transparently addicted.
from a credible brand like duMaurler. QuIx, a 51 mm product, might be marketable
The samples tried by the smokers shed as a price proposition. At regtJar prices. shorter
Makes of ash In a highly objectionable way. cigarettes offer the smker no benefits.
Much development work remains to be done Advent. with reduced nro-hazard, addressed
before the product Is ready to market. en Issue of minimal or nonexistent concern. It
Chelsea. using to-mask odour, was sounded frustrating to smoke too, likely going
quite unattractive to both sides. ,.sMokiUs out R not actively puffed on.
percei@klkis'a taste-compromised.product. The Smoke Saver idea could have a fair de-
likely to appeal only to young. I female gree of novelty Interest. However. X was per-
smokers seeking novelty rather than sc;L@Ial ceived as unlikely to be used regularly. For one
benefits. The non-smokers saw Chelsea as just thing, It would quickly become too messy and
a pretence, not a solution. smelly for pocket or purse, being In effect a
The Essence aerosol plbstIlLde provoked portable enclosed ashtray. For another, fellght-
much laughter. It Wodd ellm nate the manual Ing cigarettes results In taste degradation.
PERCEPTIDN RESEARCH I-IC
CD
BATCo document for Province of British Columbia 16 April 1999