Must you provide a smoke-free work environment?

Paula Graham, a clerical employee in the plant engineering department, believed with obvious justification that the inhalation of tobacco smoke was hazardous to her health.

By Raymond Dreyfack November 1, 1998

Paula Graham, a clerical employee in the plant engineering department, believed with obvious justification that the inhalation of tobacco smoke was hazardous to her health. More than once she tried unsuccessfully to persuade Assistant Plant Engineer Jack Fenning, her direct supervisor, to use his influence to ban smoking on the job.

“It makes me cough,” she claimed, “and every time I get a whiff of that smoke I feel like I’m breathing in cancer.”

“I sympathize with your feeling,” Fenning said. “I’d like to see smoking banned myself. But too many people object to it. Some of them work under a lot of pressure and feel, rightly or wrongly, that smoking helps them relax.”

When Graham persisted in her crusade, in an effort to accommodate her, Fenning assigned her to a desk in a corner of the office that was relatively free of smoke.

Relatively free wasn’t good enough for Graham. “I can still smell the noxious fumes.”

“Sorry, Paula, that’s the best I can do. I talked to Mr. Kramer. He says banning smoking in the department is out of the question.”

“We’ll see about that. The damn fumes are making me sick. Either you ban or I sue on the basis of disability.”

Question : If Graham follows through with her threat, how do you rate her chance of success?

Kramer’s opinion: Informed of Graham’s threat, Plant Engineer Don Kramer’s opinion was that she had no viable case. “While I concede that Graham may be allergic to the smoke and fearful of the adverse effects of inhaling it, she has failed to show any evidence that it makes her physically ill, or inhibits her normal functions. Due to these circumstances, she doesn’t qualify as a disabled person under the law.”