2 Employment involving contact with dangerous substances. Smokers are much more vulnerable than nonsmokers to the effects of exposure to certain dangerous substances which may be used in manufacturing processes. Thus, for example, a smoker exposed to asbestos fibers has ten times the risk of contracting lung cancer than does a nonsmoker similarly exposed. These special cases do not, of course, prevent employers with less stringent reasons from refusing to hire smokers. As in all personnel matters relating to smoking and health, the need for disseminating information about the smoking problem and good public relations with the workforce cannot be over-emphasized.
Many smokers are quite unaware of the economic losses which their habit causes.
For example, the Dow Chemical Company, as long ago as 1974, found that in the Company's Midland Division alone cigarette smokers each missed 5.5 days per year more, due to illness than nonsmokers. If the smokers are not impressed by loss caused to the employer, it could be pointed out to them how much they could save on health plan and insurance premiums if they could be classified as nonsmokers. If a workplace is unionized, consultation with the workforce may be regulated by the terms of a collective bargaining agreement. Some agreements may apply only to the workplace premises to ensure safe and healthful working conditions and such an agreement might not cover a policy not to hire smokers. The City was permitted to introduce its policy provided that it did so in consultation with the union.