BoatBanter.com - Wally-Mart in trouble locally

On 9/13/2011 12:14 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 00:01:24 -0700, wrote:

On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 02:20:31 -0400, wrote:

That was proposed by many bar and restaurant owners here who wanted to
maintain their smoking customer base. They wanted smoking and non
smoking restaurants, in the same chain with exactly the same menu.
Nope, it was ALL or nothing.

I'm sure their business was hurt terribly. I guess they're out of
business. Good news?

The particular restaurant that they wanted to make the "smoking" one
did close shortly after the no smoking law was passed.

Well, I guess the market forces spoke. Isn't that what you want?

No the market was not allowed to speak, They made the restaurant no
smoking, without allowing the market to decide how many people would
choose the smoking location over a no smoking location about a mile
away

Self absorbed non smokers demand access to both buildings because they
think they are missing something. Yes they are ... the fun people.
Since it's not "a necessary component" there's no action that OSHA can
take. Try again.

What?
The letter basically said OSHA does not have a standard for cigarette
smoke.

Yes, they don't have a standard. They just say there are tons of
carcinogens in it, but it's not part of manufacturing processes.

They do have a standard for all of the chemicals in question. It just
would not be low enough to bar casual smoking.

According to you. It would depend on several factors, like
concentration and proximity, for example.

Exactly, but that is not what you want. In reality it is the
concentration in PPM usually taken at a couple locations on the site..

So, when someone is puffing their cigar in my face, I'm betting the
PPM count is pretty high.

But if they are at the other end of the bar, in a smoking section with
the air going out that end, it will be too low to measure under your
nose.
Thanks for making my point.

So, now you're going to have the barkeep prevent people who are
smoking, perhaps drunk people, walking in to the other area. Thanks
for making MY point.

Why not?
The bar keep has lots of rules they enforce.

I managed one bar and worked another when I was younger that did just
that... Smoking areas in another room. It even had a smoke eater in one
corner snapping away all night long in the room...

They imply that if they use the same standard they use for
manufacturing it would not achieve the result desired by the
administration and they should just deal with this with legislation.
If they use the same standard for the listed pollutants that they use
for manufacturing facilities you probably would not be able to get
enough smokers in a room to exceed it and still be within the
occupancy code.

According to you. Nothing in the report claims the smoke is without
risk.

The letter from OSHA is basically begging off, telling the
administration that this should be handled by separate legislation and
getting them out of it..

And, it should be. So, what's your point?

So this is simply legislation based on people being offended not any
science confirming the hazard. (What OSHA does)

Really? OSHA is the only one who thinks about hazards like this? Nope.

OSHA is the government agency that sets the standards, They are also
the ones who certify the labs. (AKA NRTLs)

Occupational Safety and Health Administration. They, like other
agencies, need legislation to do their jobs. This is an example of
that. Sorry if that bothers you!

They already have legislation to regulate HAZARDOUS concentrations of
airborne chemicals. They said they do not have a standard that would
apply to the minuscule amounts in a typical concentration of cigarette
smoke.