Quote:
Originally Posted by cookie_365
The Act doesn't cover people who visit other peoples houses as part of their employment so people won't be criminalised for smoking at home.
|
So, in effect, those who visit other peoples houses as part of their work are not covered - or as equally protected - by this so called "smoking ban" which is part of the issue I referenced earlier.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cookie_365
Having said that, we've had H&S at work legislation for ages now. If someone has to visit a smokers house for a long period (ie long enough to present a risk to health) then that would already be caught by existing legislation.
|
Not so - there is no "long enough to present a risk to health" benchmark with regards to exposure to tobacco smoke - either first or second hand.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cookie_365
Companies already have the right to ask people not to smoke if one of their staff is about to visit in the sense that they can simply decline to provide the service otherwise.
|
They have the right to ask but no legal powers to insist. How many home service business can afford to refuse to service that part of their customer base which constitutes smoking customers?
Quote:
Originally Posted by cookie_365
Not sure how it works with public bodies which have statutory obligations to provide services
|
This, I believe, is part of what the "show proceedings" hope to determine.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cookie_365
....but we don't seem to have an epidemic of elderly chavs dying because social services refused to send someone round because their house was full of smoke.
|
It's not just "elderly chavs" who die of cancers caused by smoking - but your disdain towards them is touching. Likewise we don't appear to have an epidemic of people dying from diseases directly attributable to passive smoking.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cookie_365
And nothing's changed with the new act.
|
Actually, quite a lot will change with the introduction of the ban.
If the Government were truly sincere about the prime motive for this move being health related they would ban tobacco entirely instead of this mealy mouthed quick fix solution.