Skip to main content

E-Cigarettes: Not Just Blowing Smoke, a Potential Issue For Employers



Over the past few years, the emergence of E-Cigarettes in the workplace has become more common.  The question that employers now face is how to handle employees that want to "vape" while at work.  Employees often argue that since E-Cigarettes are not technically "cigarettes" per se, they should be allowed to use them at work.  Other employees, often ones that do not use E-Cigarettes, complain that they should not be subjected to the E-Cigarettes, regardless of whether or not they are not as harmful as regular cigarettes.  The question then becomes how does a company deal with the use of E-Cigarettes?  However, not all companies agree on whether or not to allow their employees to use these E-Cigarettes:  Exxon Mobile and McDonalds allow it, while CVS, Starbucks, and Wal-Mart all prohibit their employees from vaping.

While many states ban smoking in the workplace, only three states (New Jersey, North Dakota, and Utah) have added E-Cigarettes to these anti-smoking in the workplace laws.  It is likely that as E-Cigarettes become more common, more states could also ban E-Cigarettes in the workplace. 

For the time being, however, it is often left up to the employer on whether to allow employees to use E-Cigarettes at work.  Although private employers generally have no latitude to dictate what an employee does outside of work, employers are able to decide what to allow or prohibit when an employee is at work (depending, of course, on what the laws in that particular state are regarding the topic).  If an employer decides to ban E-Cigarettes at work, it is best to have a clear and effective policy and give employees reasonable notice before implementing a policy.  As the law continues to develop on this front, it is important to keep an eye on what legislation is passed in each state. 


Special thanks to the Wall Street Journal for additional information on the topic:  http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303819704579320902677845732

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

NLRB: Discussion Among Employees About Tip Pooling is Protected Concerted Activity

  This Advice Memorandum from the National Labor Relations Board’s Associate General Counsel, Jayme Sophir, addressed whether employees which discussed and complained about tip pooling at work constituted protected concerted activity. In relevant part, an employer in New York operated a chain of steakhouses.  While tip pooling was in place at these steakhouses, some of the employees objected to it on the grounds that it was not transparent and improperly divided tips among the workers.  Employees were told not to complain or talk to each other about the tip pool and were told that doing so would endanger their jobs.  Despite the employer later attempting to provide some clarity as to how the tips were being divided, rancor still existed among some employees.  At one point, the employees were told by a general manager that some employees that had been talking about the tip pool were “cleared out” and the employer would continue to do so. In the Advice Memorandum, it was noted that emplo
Post a Comment
Read more

What I’ve Been Reading This Week

A few years ago, I remember when the “Fight for $15” movement was taking off around the country.  Lo and behold, it appears that a $15/hour minimum wage is not the stopping point, which should be no surprise.  As the below article notes, New York is aggressively moving to ramp up hourly wage rates even higher.  While all the  below articles are worth a read, I called particular attention to that one. As always, below are a couple article that caught my eye this week. Disney World Workers Reject Latest Contract Offer Late last week, it was announced that workers at Disney World had rejected the most recent contract offer from the company, calling on their employer to do better.  As Brooks Barnes at The New York Times writes, the unions that represent about 32,000 workers at Disney World reported their members resoundingly rejected the 5 year contract offer which would have seen workers receive a 10% raise and retroactive increased back pay.  While Disney’s offer would have increased pa
Post a Comment
Read more

Utah Non-Compete Bill Falters in House

Last month, a non-compete bill sponsored by Representative Brian Greene (Republican from Pleasant Grove) & up for vote in the Utah House failed to make it through the Legislature.  The bill sought to ban enforcement of non-competes if they came after a worker was already employed, given no compensation (such as a bonus or promotion) for signing the non-compete, and laid off within six months.  However, by a 22 - 49 vote, the bill was resoundingly defeated after some business groups lobbied to kill the non-compete bill.  One group in particular, The Free Enterprise Utah coalition, argued that the Utah State Legislature should hold off on any changes to non compete laws in the state until a survey about non competes was done among Utah businesses.  Representative Greene had countered this claim and argued that a survey was not needed to show that the current non compete laws in the states allowed many businesses, including some small high tech companies in the state, to per
Post a Comment
Read more