Rank: Forum user 
|
We have a no smoking policy that states that smoking is only allowed in designated areas. Over the last week I have been approached by a couple of member's of staff asking me could they use electronic cigarettes in no smoking areas because they are exempt from the policy. I would be interested to know if anyone has come across this issue and what actions they took.
Steve
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user 
|
This is getting a bit weird. I understand that some companies and even airlines have banned them. I'm not sure of the rational, but it's something like "other people might get upset"
As far as I can see there is absolutely no reason to ban them anywhere for any reason related to no smoking rules or legislation. They can be rightfully used in any normal working environment. Even your cafeteria. And you certainly cannot confine them to smoking areas for any health related reason.
Now if I were to load an asthma inhaler with the nicotine solution (available on the web) would anyone think to critisize me ? Or ban me from using it ?
Merv
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Have never come across this but no smoking means no smoking and these pretend cigarettes to help addicted people to stop smoking can easily be interpreted by someone looking from a few yards away as a real cigarette, which, could give the wrong impression about the no smoking policy and cause more trouble than it is worth to even contemplate allowing them in the workplace.
I would say merv the asthma inhaler does not even come into play because it looks nothing like a cigarette so no one would take issue with it.
I think they are pretty good for people who have difficulty stopping smoking but they should not be allowed in the workplace.
My advice Steve is don't go there.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: New forum user
|
Absolute garbage. What next? Are you about to ban chewing gum, (which I find extremely offensive), just in case someone tries to chew nicotine gum at work or maybe you will put a moratorium on elastoplast or band aid to stop those willey characters who try to sneak in a few patches, strip searches at the gate or testing to ensure no one is under the infuence of a hypnotist maybe?
Come on get real I'm sure you have better things to deal with than someone who wants to walk around the office with what is actually no more harmful than a pen stuck in their mouth.
What are the reasons for the no smoking policy? Fire, passive inhalation, annoyance - so what are the effects or hazards created by a person with a plastic tube in their mouth?
Leave it alone and focus on real safety issues you are in danger of becoming an anorak.
We have a no smoking policy, for obvious reasons - we are an oil and gas company - plastic tubes, chewing gum, (against my better judgement), sticking plasters, magnetic bracelets, tea, coffee, toothpicks and anything else which helps you through the day are all exempt. If I did have anyone complaining about any of the anti-smoking aids in use, which I haven't, they would be reminded of the reasons for the no smoking policy and requested to get back to work. Hope this helps.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
A bit harsh Midgley? These pretend cigarettes are designed to look like - and act like - a cigarette without the nicotine.
I am busy enough "focussing on real safety issues" and do not need the hastle of people pretending to smoke a cigarette!
Real smokers go to the smoke shack - pretend smokers should do likewise!!
David
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
"A cigarette without the nicotine"? The whole point of them is that they provide nicotine!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Kate - not all See attached;
"The device uses heat, or in some cases ultrasonics, to vaporize a propylene glycol- or glycerin-based liquid solution into an aerosol mist, similar to the way a nebulizer or humidifier vaporizes solutions for inhalation"
David
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
I raised this issue a few months ago
http://forum.iosh.co.uk/...aspx?g=posts&t=99976
Often seem to be used by individuals who have no intention in giving up smoking and prefer to get their nicotine fix in the workplace this way rather than using patches or gum.
I took the advice given the last time and have replaced the lid on the can of worms.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
The site I'm on has had a strict 'no smoking except in designated areas' policy long before the smoking ban. I recently spotted one of the guys using one of these 'pretend fags' in the main workshops and no one batted an eyelid. It has never been brought up at any of the weekly safety meetings or any other forum for that matter.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
All the sites I visit are none smoking as most these days and for persons in office to have imitation cigarette to assist their erg to stop work and go out for one when the imitation cigarette does not give off hazardous odour then it would not be a problem, I have had workers that have cigarettes in their mouths or hands whilst around the work place but never light them. As for inhaler with nicotine inserted that would send out an odour and would be banned immediately due to passive smoking. So I would allow the elcetric cigarette and keep the happy medium.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Not sure that the nicotine has much to do with the hazards posed by passive smoking. The nicotine is the bit you are addicted to, all the carcinogens are in the smoke!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
I think this subject came up with the smoking ban - but I never have much luck with the search facility on this site.
From memory the outcome last time was that there are two products that people are taking about one is an aid to stop smoking one is a substitute for a cigarette where there is no intention of stopping smoking and it is this type that is usually called an electronic cigarette.
The smoking legislation is just that it is about smoking - it has nothing to do with nicotine etc. The electronic cigarette produces the nicotine fix by "vaporising" the nicotine hence no smoke. As such its use is not covered by the smoking ban.
If companies want to ban it then that's up to them, there may be good hygiene reasons etc why you would do this - but at the end of the day its company policy not the smoking legislation that would govern this.
Hope I have remembered these fact correctly.
Brian
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Took me a while to track this thread down, glad I did because Brian's post confirms what I believed to be the case- namely that there are at least two differnt items that need to be considered. The one that is effectively a substitute for a ciggarette but without the smoke/ passive smoking issue and a device to help smokers give up.
I have been asked about this in a work context as apparently one of these devices contains hazardous substances such as nicotine, tetramethipyrazine and Diethyl glycol and have been banned in some countries.
It is a can of worms but it is not going to go away, my first instinct was to go with a total ban as this would be the easy option but if thesse things really are harmless and help those who want to give up it seems unreasonably heavy handed.
Finding hard facts about this is proving difficult, does anyone have any access to reliable information- everything I find seems to be heavily biased one way or another.
Nic
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
It's your Company, and your rules (well, maybe not yours, but someone is "the big boss" and sets the rules.
Ignore the side issue of whether these things are safe or not, compliant or otherwise, socially acceptable or misleading and easily confused with 'real' cigarettes, and all the other nonsense.
Just make a decision, any decision you like. Implement that decision and stick to it - Job done!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
I am currently looking at this subject and nobody of authority to date can give me a definite answer to the question; does the vapour given off contain potentially harmful substances? I advise that until we know the answer we should err to caution until we do
Does anybody know if the vapour contains carcinogens or similar?
Chewing gum and similar are vastly different areas to smoking etc as we do not share gum but we do unwillingly share other peoples vapour and putting up with somebody else's residues is not a good idea nor does allowing drug addiction to take place in a work environment give off a good example to children and the like
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Can you, or someone in charge, not just make decision?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
This is the guidance my organisation are using for banning electronic cigarettes from the workplace,
The expert advice is that when people use these electronic products a nicotine cloud is released into the atmosphere along with other toxins. As a result, staff in the immediate vicinity could be exposed to the substances being released. Either by inhalation or by absorption through the skin. As there is little current regulation on these products, there is a lack of information about their potential harm. Electronic cigarettes should therefore only be used in designated smoking areas or away from the workplace.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
sean wrote:This is the guidance my organisation are using for banning electronic cigarettes from the workplace,
The expert advice is that when people use these electronic products a nicotine cloud is released into the atmosphere along with other toxins. As a result, staff in the immediate vicinity could be exposed to the substances being released. Either by inhalation or by absorption through the skin. As there is little current regulation on these products, there is a lack of information about their potential harm. Electronic cigarettes should therefore only be used in designated smoking areas or away from the workplace.
Sean,
How much did it cost you for that 'expert evidence', if indeed it was either 'expert' or 'evidence'?
If you don't want these things used in your business premises etc, say so. That's all that is necessary. No ifs, not butts(!). Just like you can say wear boots, goggles/glasses, no long hair, short sleeves, mandatory collar and tie, clean fingernails or no visible tattoos/piercings.
These faux arguments to support one view or another are risible, when all that is necessary is for a decision maker to say YES or NO, and a manager to manage.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Smoking has been banned in the workplace and public places for some considerable time now, and smokers (presumably) have by now become conditioned to that.
On that basis, why would we want to encourage anyone seriously attempting to break the habit to simulate the act of smoking in a place where they previously weren't able to? It's supposed to be a cessation device!
It may also tend to have a negative impact on youngsters and other impressionables in the same way that "real" smoking often does.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Ian I have no idea how much the expert advice cost, I work for a very large government department who do not issue advice without backing up the evidence.
Ian, why are you so angry?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
It is down to the organisation whether it wants to permit is or not.
Very few if any pros and many cons in my view.
The health hazard is described on the Harvard Medical School's/ Medical Health Publications Health Blog:-
http://www.health.harvar...p-or-hazard-201109223395
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Love it Sean and totally agree, I know it’s a discussion forum and up for a bit of banter but the guy is just bitter and twisted any argument he raise is without fact or even thought. Maybe he just needs a hug?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
I need a hug and an electronic pint of ale at my desk!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
I’m just popping on my barmaid outfit for you now hope you don’t mind the stubble on my chin!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
sean wrote:Ian I have no idea how much the expert advice cost, I work for a very large government department who do not issue advice without backing up the evidence.
Ian, why are you so angry?
Not angry, just exasperated at the inability to make a decision and stick to it.
But I do get angry about 'the large government department' that does not know the cost, or perhaps the value, of what they are dealing with!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
jay wrote:It is down to the organisation whether it wants to permit is or not.
Very few if any pros and many cons in my view.
Jay. Excellent, a decision at last, made by the organisation which can dictate whatever happens on their premises and in their time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Thomo wrote:Love it Sean and totally agree, I know it’s a discussion forum and up for a bit of banter but the guy is just bitter and twisted any argument he raise is without fact or even thought. Maybe he just needs a hug?
Thomo
Please don't be rude and/or make personal and insulting comments of that kind.
I'm surprised and rather disappointed that the Moderators haven't yet taken action to remove your post.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Jay. Excellent, a decision at last, made by the organisation which can dictate whatever happens on their premises and in their time.
Ian and thats exactly what my organisation has done!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Ian.Blenkharn wrote:
These faux arguments to support one view or another are risible, when all that is necessary is for a decision maker to say YES or NO, and a manager to manage.
I don't really understand this posting - it seems to be an argument in favour of saying "I don't know much about it, so I'll ban it, and blame elfen safety".
Surely it is right and proper to try and find out if what is proposed does pose a hazard to other people in the vicinity, and make an informed decision, rather than saying 'well, just ban it'? The latter is certainly easier, but I didn't expect to see it championed on this forum.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
My God, I am agreeing with Ian!
There is no legislation saying that these devices must be banned in the workplace.
They are legally available consumer items, so whether they are harmful or not is irrelevant – have you banned chips in your canteen?
If you (i.e. the company) want to ban these on policy grounds( not elf and safety) that is you privilege.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Guys,
Smoking wasn't banned in the workplace until very recently. Does that mean there wasn't a significant health risk to consider?
Just because legislation doesn't 'currently' do this or that, doesn't mean it can't form part of the evaluation!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Mods, I'm sure you'll agree - that was a move valuable contribution than my last 'removed' one!
Simon
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Looking at the bigger picture.
Isn't it a good thing to allow members of staff to smoke these electrical cigarettes in the workplace as it promotes a positive HEALTH culture (i.e they are giving up the Fags) therefore less time off sick for smoking related illness etc.
After reading all these posts I am now off outside to use my luxurious purpose built shelter and have a fag.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
quote=A Kurdziel]My God, I am agreeing with Ian!
There is no legislation saying that these devices must be banned in the workplace.
They are legally available consumer items, so whether they are harmful or not is irrelevant – have you banned chips in your canteen?
If you (i.e. the company) want to ban these on policy grounds( not elf and safety) that is you privilege.
Wow, today deserves a big red ring round the calendar!
Yes, ban whatever you want in your business, as long as that ban doesn't infringe various rights enshrined in law. So, for electronic cigarettes, ban them if you want, but don't pfaff around trying to decide if they are harmful or not. That isn't the issue. If you want to ban then, ban then and move on.
As I said at the outset, don't meander through various notions under the guise of H&S and health protection or the semantics of what is and what isn't a cigarette, just make a decision!
It's your privilege to do so - well, if you are in a position of authority - and if the staff don't like it they lump it! They must lump it just as much as those who might baulk at the use of goggles and glasses, or no food at their desk, or no earphones. It's not the end of labour relations, but instead it puts to rest an issue that can otherwise turn into a ridiculously troublesome issue best resolved at a stroke so that everyone can move on.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
No wonder we are not taken seriously. And if any member of the public can read this then, from me at least,SORRY to have taken up your time by making you read this. Sorry dear public but it gets like this from time to time.
Give the poor saps a pencil to stick in theiir mouths (yes yes they may well get hurt etc)
No smoking says it all. They need to grow up a little and for crying out if anyone cannot sort this out change your job.
Give up the fags...it will not hurt you and you won't look like a sad pratt pretending to smoke... jeez give me the will to live
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
The idea of banning something just for the sake of making a decision is ludicrous. Any decision must be made by gathering facts. The lack of information on passive inhalation from electrical cigarettes of nicotine and artificial smoke leave me with not doubt that they should be banned.
Our job is health and safety. To provide a safe working environment and promote good health. Chips won’t kill you in a healthy balanced diet whereas Nicotine has been proven bad for health and some asthmatics react to artificial smoke!!!
Some people have given up smoking in favour of these electrical cigarettes and have increased their intake of nicotine.
Ban it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
I had a go with one of these electronic cigarrettes last night (I'm currently trying to quit the weed using nicotine patches).
I was quite shocked at how much the vapour cloud resembled smoke - identical in volume and size under the lighting conditions in a pubs smoking area.
If I used one of these in an office or inside the pub, I would thoroughly expect to be rebuked for it.
On a wider issue, I wonder what TFLs (and airlines, railways, sporting venues etc) policy is on these? Apparently you can get them with tips that glow orange or blue. For a TFL worker to challenge everyone using one only to be told it was an electronic cig would soon cause issues I suspect.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.