Is there a robust H&S case for them not being in the workplace?

This has been discussed many times so may be worth a search of the forums as during the discussions many reasons for not allowing these have been given, although to my memory the most valid was where there were risks of fire or explosion and all electric/battery items were restricted anyway

Yes

There's lots of very good stuff out there [both legal and professionally researched] that leads a professional to err to caution as we would err to caution for other areas

The argument by smokers and the like that e-cigs may be safer than tobacco cigs to the user may stand but that does not make them safe nor especially healthy for the user or anybody else close by

should read nicotine free

They should be banned from the workplace as when the smoker exhales, anyone else can still inhale the smoke that comes our of the smokers lungs. this is one of the reasons we have banned them it our workplace As someone else has mentioned, it looks unprofessional.

Yep in many cases the nicotine is carried into the user by anti freeze and other such substances via formal suppliers and as for those who fill them themselves nobody knows just what is in them as the carrier agent

Try an experiment; -
put a number of e-cigs users in a small office and see how long it takes for the office to smell and vapour to gather - not long I can assure you as I have seen it done; so much for the 'nothing wrong with the vapour argument'

Let me see what is the greater hazard to peoples health Smoke or an Inhaler - tricky it may be used as a weapon however I think encouraging people away from ciggies is the bigger picture.

Ron
I received my information from medical experts??? However I will double check


Think of a cig with lots of small bullets that can kill U and then think of an e-gig with one bullet that can kill U = both kill its just that one does it with one and not numerous bullets and that sums it up

And how is it we still think that nicotine is OK - its an horrendous drug so all smokers must be druggies!!!!

The thing is, putting aside what I do for a living, I don't want to breath in whatever it is these things exude. It is great people want to give up smoking, but I don't see why it should affect me or even mildly concern me as I don't know exactly what it is I'm being exposed to.

While I'm at it air fresheners do not freshen air, they pump out more chemicals, which I would also prefer not to breath in. The stuff just makes me sneeze, similar to a lot of scents and perfumes people wear. Someone had sprayed themselves with something in on of our offices the other day. I walked in and felt like I was choking and gasping for air. Someone else in the office laughed and said they had given up trying to dissuade the culprit who was no longer in the room as they had gone home.

I'm sorry, but I do find all these people quite inconsiderate.

I'm probably in the minority though

Chris

Is this still going?.....

Is there a robust case to allow employees to put toxics into there mouths and lungs at work? With the increased focus on occupational health and wellbeing of staff...why would you allow the practice?

Those who wish to stop smoking should enter into a proper cessation program which is what we should be advocating....

As I said - this argument is bogus. The choice of what to allow in the workplace isn't one between real cigs or e-cigs, it's between e-cigs and nothing.

Not breathing in unspecified vapours is less hazardous than breathing in unspecified vapours, in my opinion. It's precisely because there is no hard evidence that the vapours are harmless that I don't want to breathe them in.

It's true that there is not enough evidence that these are unsafe or safe to the person who is 'smoking' them.
They are considered more safe than tobacco cigarettes.

to the passive 'smoker' they do pose problems as they do smell and can trigger asthma in my experience - my bosses secondary business is distribution of these. It's a similar smell to aromatherapy oils - strong perfume.

Even people who have no breathing difficulties more than noticed the smell from them and actually had them sneezing, dry throats etc - which the cynics might say happens anyway - but I observed over a period of time.

You can see the vapour given off and if you can smell it you are inhaling it. When they are being re-filled the perfume smell is quite overpowering

I have heard that some people are being able to quit smoking tobacco by using these so there may be a case for using them as a cessation method when more details are known. Quite a few people I know when they try to stop smoking miss the action of having something in their hand - this might assist with that.

I think its a personal choice what people want to inhale so long as there is no passive 'smoking'.

I don't know why this straw man is so persistent.

It is NOT an alternative to a cat 1 carcinogen. The alternative to e-cig vapour is no e-cig vapour. If you ban e-cigs in the workplace you don't get class 1 carcinogen, you just get no e-cig vapour. If you ban e-cigs in the workplace you don't get real cigarettes instead.

The 'alternative' or 'lesser harm' argument is utterly, utterly bogus.

Do the proponents of e-cigs really think "you should allow this thing, because an alternative that's illegal would be worse" is really a coherent and compelling argument?

We must allow people to get plastered on gin at lunchtime because if they used heroin that would be more harmful?

Oh, I'm sorry, I thought it was a forum about Occupational Safety AND HEALTH.

Just to be clear: I'm not promoting e-cig use in the workplace. I'm suggesting that we in health and safety need to maintain a proper sense of perspective.

The first thing you need to consider is what is your aim in relation to an e-cig policy?. I think that your policy aim should be to reduce harm to everybody in your organisation.

The average smoking rate in the UK is about 20%, which means that on average 10% of your colleagues will die a slow, painful and early death due to smoking. If you put in a policy that encourages your smoking colleagues to switch to vaping and that policy is successful it will save more lives than any other health & Safety policy or initiative.

E-cigs are a massive employee health prize which should not be lightly dismissed.

If you treat them as cigarettes you reduce the chances of persuading a smoker to switch and increase the chances of an early death.

Are e-cigs safe?....., nothing is safe, the dose makes the poison, studies so far show insignificant effects on bystanders, ASH have said -

"- ASH supports enhanced regulation to ensure the safety and reliability of electronic cigarettes
and to prevent their promotion to non-smokers and children.
- However, in the absence of evidence of significant harm to bystanders, ASH does not support
the inclusion of electronic cigarettes in smokefree laws which would completely prohibit their
use in enclosed public places."

I do not think you would go far wrong in adopting ASH's point of view, please bear in mind that ASH are an organisation with a passionate hatred of the tobacco industry and can in no way be seen as anything other than a very independent organisation with respect to e-cigs.

There were a few topics mentioned in this thread that are worthy of further analysis.

One poster recommended that we should encourage smokers to use traditional stop smoking services, that is fair enough and if it works that is great for the individual smoker involved. However stop smoking services have an appalling success rate of about 5%, in the last 5 years e-cigs have created 3 times the number of ex smokers that the stop smoking services managed in a decade ( and at zero cost to the tax payer ). Putting smokers off e-cigs and encouraging them to use traditional NRT may turn out to be very deadly advice.

One poster mentioned that the symptoms of Asthma may be worsened, the most recent research showed a marked improvement in Asthma symptoms. It is also worth noting that the principal ingredient in e-cigs is also present in asthma inhalers.

Many people appear to push for a complete ban in the workplace, unless you employ draconian measures such a ban is completely unenforceable, e-cig vapour dissipates very quickly and leaves no lingering odour. An e-cig ban is as achievable as a ban on people sucking the end of their pens.

My advice would be adopt a pragmatic approach, my organisation bans smoking completely on site but allows vaping in any external area ( I did push for a more permissive policy but HR were concerned about company image ). This has led to quite a number of hardened smokers who have switched and will almost certainly have saved lives, not sure I would be able to say that if we had simply treated them like real cigarettes and banned them.

The point I was trying to make is that if a smoker in your workplace sneaked off to a store room, toilets or similar for a sneaky one, it is almost impossible not to notice that someone has been smoking - horrible smell, ash, dog ends etc.

If a vaper does the same thing, no one would be any the wiser - no residual smell, no ash, no dog ends, no lingering odour on their clothes. Unless you place all your employees under close and continual observation, the enforcement of a vaping ban is basically impossible.

For a forum populated by so-called health and safety professionals, the level of ignorance shown in this thread is quite astonishing. I'm personally glad that burning people at the stake is no longer legal. May I suggest to those who would have been at home in Salem, that instead of flinging your arms around aimlessly, that you actually read the vast amount of research that has been done on ecigs. You may come to a different conclusion.

Our policy on e-cigarettes is the same as for "real" cigarettes - not to be used in the workplace and not to be used when supporting our service users (my company provides care/support for disabled people).

Myself and HR colleagues agreed on the above position for a few reasons, including:

Public perception - could look like staff member is smoking a cigarette
Infection control - hand to mouth cross-contamination risk when providing the support to service users.
Also the fact that they are unregulated and the quality/contents of them can vary depending who it was purchased from.

We do not expect our 'vaping' staff to use the smoking area, instead we agree a separate area for them to use.

I think making staff go outside to use them can also be helpful. From my experience, those using e-cigarettes are constantly puffing on them (far more regularly than they ever would with a cigarette). Therefore, they become a smoking replacement aid, rather than a smoking cessation aid. Therefore, having staff at work use them in the same way they would have used cigarettes (ie having to go outside) can help to wean them off the e-cigarettes after they have served their purpose of weaning off real cigarettes.

I'm sure many of you will disagree with this approach...but we're happy with it.