# UK Employers instructed to support vaping



## Alex (7/7/16)

*

*
*Employers instructed to support vaping*
Construction News
Thu July 07 2016

*New guidance from Public Health England instructs employers to make a clear distinction between tobacco and vaping in their smoking policies.*




*Above:* Research suggests vaping does more good than harm

The guidance goes counter to common custom and practice in the construction industry where, according to research by _The Construction Index_, employers generally regard vaping on e-cigarettes as no different to smoking tobacco.

As we have previously reported, contractors Willmott Dixon and Skanska, plant hire group Hewden and machinery manufacturer JCB are among construction industry companies that consider e-cigarettes to be no different from tobacco rolled in paper and have adopted policies accordingly.

However, they are wrong to do so, according to Public Health England (PHE), the government body that exists to protect and improve the nation’s health and wellbeing.

In new guidance on vaping in public places1, employers are specifically told: “E-cigarette use is not covered by smokefree legislation and should not routinely be included in the requirements of an organisation’s smokefree policy.”

It adds: “Vapers should not be required to use the same space as smokers, as this could undermine their ability to quit and stay smokefree.”

PHE says that employers should make a clear distinction between vaping and smoking. “E-cigarette use does not meet the legal or clinical definitions of smoking,” the new guidance says. “Furthermore, international peer-reviewed evidence suggests that e-cigarettes carry a fraction of the risk of cigarettes and have the potential to help drive down smoking rates, denormalise smoking and improve public health. So policies need to be clear on the differences between vaping and smoking.”

In fact, companies that continue to ban vaping may actually be contributing to the early death of their employees, according to an expert independent evidence review published in 2015 by Public Health England.

Professor Kevin Fenton, national director of health and wellbeing at PHE said: “The evidence is clear that vaping is much less harmful than smoking and that e-cigarettes are helping many smokers to quit.

“This new framework will encourage organisations to consider both the benefits and the risks when developing their own policies on e-cigarettes. Different approaches will be appropriate in different places, but policies should take account of the evidence and clearly distinguish vaping from smoking.”

PHE also says that, in contrast to the known harm from exposure to secondhand smoke, there is currently no evidence of harm from secondhand e-cigarette vapour and the risks are likely to be extremely low.

Cancer Research UK supports PHE’s position, with tobacco policy manager George Butterworth saying: “E-cigarettes are still a relatively new product, so it’s understandable that many people and businesses may not know how to deal with them. The evidence so far shows e-cigarettes are much safer than tobacco and they have the potential to help people give up a deadly addiction. It’s important the benefit of using them are maximised while reducing any negative impact, and organisations need independent advice from Public Health England to set out their own policies.”

source: http://www.theconstructionindex.co.uk/news/view/employers-instructed-to-support-vaping

link to pdf: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...igarettes-in-public-places-and-workplaces.PDF

Reactions: Like 6 | Winner 7


----------



## KimVapeDashian (7/7/16)

@Alex Brilliant!

This really is the way forward

Reactions: Like 1 | Agree 1


----------



## Roodt (7/7/16)

I fully agree with the article. I am new to "vaping" and it has helped me cut down on my stinkies enormously ( from 2 packs a day down to max 10 ) in the space of a few weeks, this would never have happened had I not started vaping. the only issue I struggle with now is that I have to spend my healthier vaping time in a Smoking are at work with a people smoking stinkies, thus being bombarded with secondhand smoke ( more dangerous than firsthand smoke ). All this because company policy sees vaping as smoking...

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Greyz (7/7/16)

I wish I could print this article and paste it up in every smoke-pen here in Toyota's plant..

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## RichJB (7/7/16)

It's a good idea but we should also understand that there is little motive for non-smokers/non-vapers to make these decisions on their own. They don't do either habit, they view them as roughly the same, they aren't interested in spending hours reading up about it, so they just designate one area in the company as a smoking and vaping space. It it's not something they do themselves, why would they even be interested in it?

Greyz, I think you'd get better results printing this out and taking it to the CEO or Exco. The people who frequent the smoking spaces generally don't make company policy. I think that if you approached this proactively and without trying to be confrontational about it, they might respond very favourably. If you put it to them that vapers vape precisely because they don't want to inhale smoke anymore, would they not be prepared to give vapers their own spaces? For sure, management aren't going to do the research on their own. Someone has to do it for them. Who better than a vaper? There may be logistical difficulties to providing different spaces for vapers. But it's worth a try imo.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Roodt (7/7/16)

RichJB said:


> It's a good idea but we should also understand that there is little motive for non-smokers/non-vapers to make these decisions on their own. They don't do either habit, they view them as roughly the same, they aren't interested in spending hours reading up about it, so they just designate one area in the company as a smoking and vaping space. It it's not something they do themselves, why would they even be interested in it?
> 
> Greyz, I think you'd get better results printing this out and taking it to the CEO or Exco. The people who frequent the smoking spaces generally don't make company policy. I think that if you approached this proactively and without trying to be confrontational about it, they might respond very favourably. If you put it to them that vapers vape precisely because they don't want to inhale smoke anymore, would they not be prepared to give vapers their own spaces? For sure, management aren't going to do the research on their own. Someone has to do it for them. Who better than a vaper? There may be logistical difficulties to providing different spaces for vapers. But it's worth a try imo.


Another option might be to take all the relevant information to a HS&EP meeting, and raise it as a matter to be added to their agenda, all these agenda items go to the Management HS&EP meeting where the concern will get raised. this might then also get Management on board as to getting some sort of "incentive" going for smokers who convert to vaping as opposed to normal cigarettes, maybe being allowed to vape in the office if or so on.
hell, if I could vape in the office, I would be far more productive....

Reactions: Optimistic 1


----------



## Greyz (7/7/16)

RichJB said:


> It's a good idea but we should also understand that there is little motive for non-smokers/non-vapers to make these decisions on their own. They don't do either habit, they view them as roughly the same, they aren't interested in spending hours reading up about it, so they just designate one area in the company as a smoking and vaping space. It it's not something they do themselves, why would they even be interested in it?
> 
> Greyz, I think you'd get better results printing this out and taking it to the CEO or Exco. The people who frequent the smoking spaces generally don't make company policy. I think that if you approached this proactively and without trying to be confrontational about it, they might respond very favourably. If you put it to them that vapers vape precisely because they don't want to inhale smoke anymore, would they not be prepared to give vapers their own spaces? For sure, management aren't going to do the research on their own. Someone has to do it for them. Who better than a vaper? There may be logistical difficulties to providing different spaces for vapers. But it's worth a try imo.



I wish things were different here but unfortunately their stance is its a tobacco product and because there is no concrete long term medical research on the effects of second hand smoking, they have no choice but to treat it as if it was harmful to non-smokers.
Companies will continue to do what the law requires them to do and that is to protect non-smokers from secondary smoke. If the country passed a law that differentiates classic tobacco products from electronic nicotine delivery devices then companies will be forced to adapt.
Although not happy about their stance I can understand why they have taken this stance and just like when I used to smoke cigarettes I will just obide by their rules. As much as they suck balls and it's make absolutely no sense confining me to a smoke-pen to get the same second smoke you trying to protect non-smokers from.

I'd just like to say that I am a non-smoker too...

EDIT: I'm sure if the law stated that vapers should be afforded their own vape area seperate to the smoke area's then Toyota would oblige and create the spaces. But because they not bound by any law nothing will be done.

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## RichJB (7/7/16)

Greyz said:


> I wish things were different here but unfortunately their stance is its a tobacco product and because there is no concrete long term medical research on the effects of second hand smoking, they have no choice but to treat it as if it was harmful to non-smokers.



Yes but you're not asking them to allow vaping everywhere (i.e. posing a risk to non-smokers and non-vapers), you're just asking them to provide a different area for vapers, where they can be away from smokers. The vapers would still be away from the non-smokers so nobody is being exposed to second-hand vapour.

I realise it's a tough ask because companies tend to be set in their ways. But you say that they will only change when it becomes law that they must change. That law is never going to happen unless someone drives it and pushes for it. Smokers aren't going to push for it, non-smokers aren't going to push for it, management aren't going to push for it. That leaves vapers themselves. If we want law changes that benefit us, it's up to us to drive that process. Even if your request is turned down, you might at least plant the seed in management's minds that smoking and vaping are different. That is one step in a long process to legally separating the two.

It will take a long time, these things do. Look how long it took for smoke-free zones to become law - it was several decades after it became widely known that smoking is harmful. But the process needs to start somewhere. If we leave it up to others, nothing will ever get done.


----------



## Greyz (7/7/16)

RichJB said:


> Yes but you're not asking them to allow vaping everywhere (i.e. posing a risk to non-smokers and non-vapers), you're just asking them to provide a different area for vapers, where they can be away from smokers. The vapers would still be away from the non-smokers so nobody is being exposed to second-hand vapour.
> 
> I realise it's a tough ask because companies tend to be set in their ways. But you say that they will only change when it becomes law that they must change. That law is never going to happen unless someone drives it and pushes for it. Smokers aren't going to push for it, non-smokers aren't going to push for it, management aren't going to push for it. That leaves vapers themselves. If we want law changes that benefit us, it's up to us to drive that process. Even if your request is turned down, you might at least plant the seed in management's minds that smoking and vaping are different. That is one step in a long process to legally separating the two.
> 
> It will take a long time, these things do. Look how long it took for smoke-free zones to become law - it was several decades after it became widely known that smoking is harmful. But the process needs to start somewhere. If we leave it up to others, nothing will ever get done.



I know it's a simple request but like I said my companies stance is their doing as required by law. The law does not require that vapers have a seperate enclosed area to vape so they will not extend cost to create a space their not legally obligated to create.
I hate it but everything these days is about driving operational and expenditure costs down. The buzz word around here is cost cutting and creating vape-pens isn't on any companies "to do list" - to them it would just be a wasteful expense their not required to fulfill.

If there was such a law that catered for vapers having a seperate area to vape I know my company would provide it. There are smoke-pens all over the plant and I swear your never more than a 2 minute walk from 1 no matter where you are. To get an idea of how huge this plant is you can Google Toyota Plant Isipingo and get an aerial view. So having a smoke-pen with 2 or 3 min walk is a huge achievement.
I'm a patient killer, I'll sit back and vape till the countries law catchup.


----------



## Greyz (7/7/16)

Just about everything you see in this picture belongs to Toyota City

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Roodt (7/7/16)

I fully agree with all the comments and opinions here, and yes @Greyz i am bloody opportunistic  in my approach to life. So I guess the best bet for now would be immigration to the UK? Seems to be the only pro vape country at the moment.


----------



## Greyz (7/7/16)

Roodt said:


> I fully agree with all the comments and opinions here, and yes @Greyz i am bloody opportunistic  in my approach to life. So I guess the best bet for now would be immigration to the UK? Seems to be the only pro vape country at the moment.


Please don't take my Optimistic vote as negative, it was very much tongue in cheek lol

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk


----------



## Roodt (7/7/16)

Greyz said:


> Please don't take my Optimistic vote as negative, it was very much tongue in cheek lol
> 
> Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk


No stress bru  i took as tongue in cheek... misses reckons my sense of humour is my best quality, probably the only one she married me for

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Greyz (7/7/16)

Roodt said:


> No stress bru  i took as tongue in cheek... misses reckons my sense of humour is my best quality, probably the only one she married me for


Lmao, I just had to clarify. Seems lately my posts are misinterpreted a lot lol
My sense of humour is warped at the best of times. @Stosta can vouch for that  

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk


----------



## Roodt (7/7/16)

Greyz said:


> Lmao, I just had to clarify. Seems lately my posts are misinterpreted a lot lol
> My sense of humour is warped at the best of times. @Stosta can vouch for that
> 
> Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk


Then we shall get along just fine. They say dark humour is like food, not everybody gets it

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Greyz (7/7/16)

Roodt said:


> Then we shall get along just fine. They say dark humour is like food, not everybody gets it


Cold bra cold    we definitely going to get along just swell  

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk


----------

