absolutely NO sympathy for smokers in airport

[bizzy liz]

OK,
I am a smoker

devil devil devil SOME of you say, and probably with some justice.

However, can someone explain the total lack of sympathy for us in airports where ABSOLUTELY no smoking is allowed once in the terminal?

I have recently been in Malaga and there is a smoking area in the departure area. How civilized, and an absolute boon for those of us who may be delayed. No complaints from other passengers as the area is cut off. But elsewhere...... well in Dublin recently, I was delayed 4 hours and could not get a ciggie. Me and others too. Tempers frayed. You can guess the rest.

Alright, I agree with no smoking in public areas, but really, in an airport, where people are stressed enough with possible fear of flying, and bags, buggies, bottles, babies, grannies, and delays, surely a place out of sight and smell for us could be arranged?

I doubt I'll get much sympathy for my plight, but anyone?????

[Hambleite]

Completely agree! A seperate room for us to have a cheeky one before spending hours on a delayed tin can. Terminal 3 LHR had a room. T'was perfect

[bizzy liz]

Oh my,

I really didn't expect a fellow traveller! Well, what should we do?

Do Airport authorities not accept that at least 25% of their passengers need nicotine? I think banning smoking in an airport is cruel and unusual punishment.

Could this be a reason for SOME air rage???

I hasten to add that even without nicotine, I can cope......just!

[Rollingthunder]

YVR had a couple or three smoking rooms, sealed with separate air in and out. Now all closed and you can't smoke outside within 3 metres of a door or air inlet.

[Wangja]

Outside UK and US, most airports have smoking rooms and at least in new-build, these seem to have been easily accommodated. As often as not, many of the occupants are staff who face the same problems as passengers.

Of course, if one is really desperate, one could light up in the bar, be arrested and enjoy a smoke while in prison.

Or, be elected as an MP and smoke in the Palace of Westminister.

[Rush2112]

Filthy habit. However, I don't see why an airport cannot set aside an enclosed space for the pariahs.

[Load Toad]

I can see no problem with having a dedicated smoking room for smokers.

[Hokulea]

It's my understanding, and it may well be wrong, that in the UK it's not so much the airport authority's decision rather it's the law and they have little choice in not providing a smoking area? I think it's the same in the US, or at least in certain states.

[Al Fakhem]

"that at least 25% of their passengers need nicotine"

Aren't nicotine patches made precisely for this?

[Beer_n_Tabs]

It's my understanding, and it may well be wrong, that in the UK it's not so much the airport authority's decision rather it's the law and they have little choice in not providing a smoking area?

Yep me thinks you are correct, it is not the airport. It is the law, the whole smoking in public buildings bit. So as frustrating as it maybe (I say this as a smoker) we don't have a lot of choice.

Anyway, time to pop outside for a Tab, anyone wanna join me? :ok:

[Wader2]

Personnally I would prefer you to be inside a sealed room with an airlock rather than lounging outside the doors, looking untidy, and polluting the air we non-smokers breathe.

I think there is a 3m rule too where you should not smoke near a door. Certainly you can't smoke in a bike shed or bus shelter as they have more than 50% walls.

[CFD]

EMA has just constructed a caged area outside the terminal but airside for the smokers.At least it has a roof!

[PaperTiger]

However, can someone explain the total lack of sympathy for us in airports where ABSOLUTELY no smoking is allowed once in the terminal?Very simple. The anti-smoking powers do not believe that the vile smoker-devils deserve any sympathy at all. They are to be ridiculed, hounded, persecuted and ultimately exterminated. Exterminate. Exterminate.

[R J Kinloch]

Last time I went through Sydney Airport (a couple of years ago now) they had a smokers lounge in International Departures:D

Only problem was that no one cleaned it :yuk:

[deltayankee]

Stockholm Arlanda also has little smoking chambers in the departure/arrival lounge and I recall that in Frankfurt smoking seems to be encouraged.

[bizzy liz]

thanks for your (mostly) sympathetic support. Yeah yeah I know about the LAW (an ass most of the time), but has anyone heard that Shannon airport, despite the smoking ban in Ireland, has a dedicated smoking area for ....wait for it...... the transitting US marines and soldiers on the way to Iraq and probably rendition somewhere or other.

Only problem is, the commercial passenger is not allowed anywhere near it for Homeland Security reasons or the law in Ireland for the non marine I suppose.

Some spokesperson for SNN will no doubt scream that THIS IS UNTRUE!, but I believe it, anything to keep the US planes flying in, It's just not fair.

[radeng]

I am somewhat surprised that our dear government hasn't allowed smoking in special smoking rooms in such places as airports, railway stations etc, subject to a suitable entry fee (plus VAT). I have no doubt that Bloody Awful Airports (Heathrow Ltd) would leap onto this idea to increase revenue.....

I believe it is still the case that the revenue raised from tobacco sales exceeds the amount spent by the NHS on smoking related diseases, let alone the savings brought about by the reduction in time that pensions are paid.

BTW, I stopped smoking over 30 years ago, and can't stand the smell these days. so I don't have an axe to grind....

[VAFFPAX]

As a non-smoker I have absolutely no objections to an airside smoking area that smokers can get their fix in before the flight. The only thing I would like is that the area (if a closed area) has an air curtain to 'dust smokers off' so to speak. :-)

S.

[kingston_toon]

Ah yes, I saw something similar to what deltayankee described at Skavsta... 2 stools, with a table in the middle, a roof and 3 sides... and some sort of high-powered extraction system which meant you could stand right next to the booth and not smell a thing! Great idea... I didn't get a chance to try it as I was late, but next time...

[Shunter]

The indoor thing is simply out of the question now in the UK, for obvious reasons. However... I can't believe noone's taken a proactive stance on this. A lot of airports in the UK could provide, at relatively trivial cost, an area for outside smoking (Singapore being an excellent example). As a smoker, I don't for a moment expect to be subsidised in this respect, so stick a full-height turnstile entry on it that takes £2 coins.

The airport are going to make money from it, and smokers are catered for. Take a very low figure as an example... 10000 people pass through an airport in a day. Say 3000 of them smoke to some degree. Then say 1000 of those aren't bothered about having a fag pre-flight. The other 2000 use the facility once. That's £1.5m in the coffers just in a year. The return covers the construction costs 10x over, the rest is pure profit.

[Mark in CA]

Devil's advocate hat on:

Perhaps the airport authorities, especially here in the litigious U.S. (and especially in California), are thinking that by providing a special room specifically for the purpose of smoking, they might be seen as encouraging smoking which, they fear, could expose them to litigation should someone get sick and turn around and sue them for damages.

Just a thought.

[lurkette]

I know addiction to cigs is really hard to break so yes, some sympathy here, but the smoke makes so many people sick. Especially kids with asthma. Now that the habit is banished to outdoors, there are a lot of toxic sidewalks...that's no solution either.

Smoking rooms...hermetically sealed!

Or chew the nicotine gum if you don't want lung cancer...it's a pretty horrific death...good luck with quitting someday in time to avoid it...

[redfred]

surely when your airside you are not in the UK as such and any rules after passport control should not count after security so UK law should not come into it

[Pontius Navigator]

Just to wind things up further, what about the smoker?

Some smokers reek of stale smoke. Clearly clothing such as coats and sweaters have not been cleaned. Some even have dragon breath.

If I had a seat next to such a smoker I would have to move. Sorry, I just cannot tolerate the smell.

My intolerance has increased over the years. Really since the 70s as fewer and fewer have smoked so the air has become cleaner and, I suspect, made me far less tolerant.

[TWApilot]

The answer is simple....

Just start chewing tobacco!!!

Not only can you chew in the terminal, you can also chew on the plane, too!

We pilot types chew up in the cockpit during flight all the time. Good nicotine fix, and totally legal.

[GwynM]

Where do you put the spitoon?:yuk:

[denis555]

but I've put up with ridiculous no-smoking sections of bars
No smoking sections are out of the question - but smoking rooms for smokers only could still be accomodated without upsetting anyone. ( no smoking in bars or resteraunts though):eek:

[amanoffewwords]

surely when your airside you are not in the UK as such and any rules after passport control should not count after security so UK law should not come into it

which country is airside in then :confused:

I don't have any sympathy for your plight. For so long as a non-smoker I have endured second-hand smoke from people who really did not give a toss about how I felt having to breathe the noxious fumes. I know it's not very tolerant of me, but I've put up with ridiculous no-smoking sections of bars and restaurants, and indeed airports for long enough to say thank God for the ban.

Well said DCP130C :D

[denis555]

no-smoking sections of bars and restaurants, and indeed airports for long enough to say thank God for the ban.


I don't think anyone is suggesting people to smoke in open areas ie 'no smoking sections' That will never happen - nor should it. Smoking rooms will never happen either but they would be a compromise that allowed non smokers to carry on unaffected and untroubled....:ok:

...unless the very thought of someone else smoking somewhere upset you... I think thats called Tertiary smoking .( sitting nest to somebody who is thinking of smoking )...:D

[PaperTiger]

unless the very thought of someone else smoking somewhere upsets youGot it in one, Denis :hmm:

[fivejuliet]

hanks for your (mostly) sympathetic support. Yeah yeah I know about the LAW (an ass most of the time), but has anyone heard that Shannon airport, despite the smoking ban in Ireland, has a dedicated smoking area for ....wait for it...... the transitting US marines and soldiers on the way to Iraq and probably rendition somewhere or other.

Only problem is, the commercial passenger is not allowed anywhere near it for Homeland Security reasons or the law in Ireland for the non marine I suppose.

Some spokesperson for SNN will no doubt scream that THIS IS UNTRUE!, but I believe it, anything to keep the US planes flying in, It's just not fair.

Yes that is untrue- It is accesable to anybody whilst airside- soldiers or no soldiers!

[Seat62K]

I must say that in my experience there is considerable non-containment of cigarette smoke within the designated smoking "rooms" which AENA has constructed at Spanish airports since the law changed there. These rooms appear to have ventillation systems but the smoke typically pollutes much of the surrounding vicinity. I can think of one gate area in Terminal 4 Barajas, used for Iberia's Spanish domestic flights, which is particularly unpleasant in this regard.

[denis555]

These rooms appear to have ventillation systems but the smoke typically pollutes much of the surrounding vicinity


At the risk of sounding like a spokesperson for the smokers ( a thankless task and a very odd one for me as a non smoker and hater of cigarette smoke :ouch:) - there are badly designed rooms around, but others have a simple 'air lock' double door and adequate ventilation that even an asthmatic ASH supporting bulldog would fail to whiff from 3 metres. There is no excuse for 'leaky' smoking rooms and they should be banned and reconstructed.

Just converting a brrom cupboard will not do.

[Kerosine]

You need to look at the bigger picture folks, the government in conjunction with Department of Health want to keep pressure on the smokers. They want to inconvenience you by making you go without, stand in the rain or outside and ultimately pay more for your smokes. They pump millions into free NHS 'Stop Smoking' services, they offer helplines, they advertise prolifically about the dangers and effects of smoking, they've outlawed smoking in a public spaces, I'm sure this is reflected in BAA's (or whoever owns the airports') policy.

They don't want to make it easy for you, even if it would lower stress levels and *possibly* reduce air-rage :ugh:

[denis555]

Kerosine i think you have hit the mail on the head. It explains why there is no compromise in the legislation. Because they want you to stop. fullstop

[Tudor]

But isn't it also something to do with protecting the employees from having to work in a smokey environment? I believe one of the reasons for the smoking ban in pubs/clubs was to do with the rights of the staff. Presumably somebody would have to enter a smoking room occasionally to clean it and empty the ashtrays and I'm guessing BAA (or whomever) have a legal obligation to provide a smoke-free workplace for all its employees.

[GwynM]

Tudor,
you're forgetting that smokers (like cyclists in London) have no thought for other peoples' rights compared to their perceived right to inflict their smells on other people. Admittedly you can now smell BO and stale beer in pubs where before it was masked by the smell of stale smoke (and often I wouldn't even go into them if they were too smoky).

What people need to do, before asserting their rights, is to realise that with rights come obligations, and act more courteously to other people, and that includes using a mouth freshener to avoid braething fag ash fumes over us when talking.

bit of a rant for a Thursday morning - don't know what came over me:confused:

[TightSlot]

Just out of curiosity? I object to the multiple forms of havoc that alcohol inflicts on our society (including breath). Drunks have no thought for other peoples' rights compared to their perceived right to inflict their behavior on other people. Should I be pressing for an alcohol ban in public places?

I guess that's my rant too - I smoke, and I do accept that I have to look after the rights of others: I still feel that an area outside could be provided for smokers in most terminals: It seems a minor imposition on others, but obviously I'm missing something and it's impossible

[BlueTui]

For years, BHX had a smoking room for employees- mainly cabin crew prior to flight and still sealed off over a year later it still stinks out the corridoor from 25FT away!

It makes me wrech even more now the air is clearer. Smoking rooms are not the answer.

Maybe setting up a tunnel/corridoor to the "outside world" for the smokers where they are not allowed to take any luggage but to nip out for a quick one... before a flight?
Perhaps difficult for the single traveller but without the luggage it would be a simple thing as walking through a scanner and back to "airside"

maybe something to be explored?

[Wader2]

Because they want you to stop. fullstop

No they don't.

What all the 'smoking kills' and NHS won't treat smokers messages is all smoke and mirrors (:))

If they were serious about stopping smoking they would use the Norwegian approach to drinking. They would increase the tax to the level that makes petrol look cheap. True this would increase cross-channel trade and possibly hit tax revenues but a true non-smoking policy would be aiming for NIL tax revenue from tobacco.

No the real reason for the smoking ban and publicity is very simply one of litigation. If they do nothing to discourage smoking then they would be open to a charge of complicity in damaging peoples health from passive smoking.

It makes me wrech even more now the air is clearer.

Absolutely.

I used to fly in a smoky aircraft. I didn't particularly notice the smell but when I got home and stripped off sweaty, smoke saturated underwear Mrs Wader used to make me strip off in the garage.

The cleaner the air the greater the contrast.

[GwynM]

TightSlot,
as always a moderate reply:)

I think that society is slowly changing in its attitudes to both alcohol and smoking. 25 years ago (or slightly longer) it was almost accepted to have one for the road before driving home, and people caught drink driving were treated by friends and colleagues as being the victim of bad luck. Now they are treated with disdain. The same thing is now happening with speeding - see the comments on some forums about Anne Robinson yesterday.

Five years ago the big 4x4 was seen to be aspirational, now the owners are pariahs, especially those blocking up my commute to work with the school run. There are other examples such as attittudes to fur coats.

The attitudes to smoking are also changing slowly, just look at how many films / TV programmes show people smoking. I have no objection to people smoking on their own territory, but when it impinges on me, then I object. As an example I recently spent 4 days in Kangerlussauq (using SAS air miles), and couldn't go to the bar because my eyes started watering when I got near it. Even on an xmas holiday in Switzerland this year it was noticable how many people smoked in bars, and that's after only 6 months of the ban.

If it were possible to stop the smell of smoke from reaching me, with excellent ventillation and use of separate areas, then there's no problem.

As for alcohol, I fully appreciate your point, and will try to be less leary in future:O

[denis555]

No the real reason for the smoking ban and publicity is very simply one of litigation.

I disagree – since the Government proposed the ban and they would never get sued.


I used to fly in a smoky aircraft. I didn't particularly notice the smell but when I got home and stripped off sweaty, smoke saturated underwear Mrs Wader used to make me strip off in the garage.

You flew in your underwear! Seriously though I don’t see the relevance of that in the context of supplying air tight smoking rooms. Nobody is suggesting smoking in areas with non-smokers around so all the “used to come home smelling like an ashtray” stories are irrelevant to the issue.

I have noticed that threads where it is suggested that smokers have their own rooms – without bothering anyone else always seem to degenerate into comments related to the old pre-ban days of open areas and smoking in pubs. That is history and cannot be used as a justification to continue the ban on smoking rooms. If you do object then please frame your objection in the context of adults indulging in a pastime that would not affect you (apart from the subject of bad breath – which comes down to an issue of tolerance of bad breath rather than smoking).

[Kerosine]

As it stands the government needs all the cash it can get so to a point, yes they want the tax revenue.

Lets assume they enforce a very strict non-smoking policy and tax them to high heaven to force smokers out of the habit.
The real question is: If we assume the money spent on smoking related health problems increases proportionally to the people smoking (therefore tax revenue), can we assume that (given a enough time of course) a reduction in number of smokers, and therefore tax revenue lost, will be proportional to a reduction in NHS costs?

In other words, will we have a short term deficit in tax terms or will it all even out in the end?

An if this is the case, and due to the long time periods involved in the effects of smoking (10, 20 years??), how will we fill this gap?

Lots of questions, I'm afraid I don't have answers though!

[bizzy liz]

To Five Juliet 8th July......

Well, I never knew that there was one law for the SNN passengers and another for everyone else! Makes an ass of the smoking ban in all other ROI airports doesn't it?
If what you say is true - that anyone, including US army personnel can use a smoking area in SNN then all I can say is the law is really an ass! If it is allowed in SNN why not in all other ROI airports? Ahhhhhhh yes, to keep the US traffic coming through and the revenue that brings. Sure God help them, they wouldn't have had a ciggie for 6 hours, and then they have to go to onwards to Iraq where they might not even get a beer.

And I am not a cynic - Yet....

Any views on this anomaly, if true.