Smoker protection law explained

In the United States, smoker protection laws are state statutes that prevent employers from discriminating against employees for using tobacco products. Currently twenty-nine states and the District of Columbia have such laws. Although laws vary from state to state, employers are generally prohibited from either refusing to hire or firing an employee for using any type of tobacco product during non-working hours and off of the employer's property. In four states (California, Colorado, New York, and North Carolina), there is no specific law related to employee tobacco use but smokers are protected under broader state statutes that prohibit employers from discriminating against any employee who engages in a lawful activity. California also has a law that protects employees who engage in lawful activity, but it has been interpreted by the courts as not creating any new substantive rights but instead set forth a process to pursue claims for violation of existing Labor Code protections before the state Division of Labor Standards Enforcement.

Most of these laws were first enacted in the late 1980s and early 1990s. However, as discrimination against smokers in the workplace has become more widespread in recent years, several states have enacted such laws more recently. In states without smoker protection laws some employers have begun refusing to hire new employees who smoke.[1] While many of these employers are using the honor system to enforce these policies, a few of them are requiring that employees be tested for nicotine. Many of the businesses with these policies are in the healthcare industry, but some county and municipal governments have also enacted such policies.[2] [3]

Arizona previously had a smoker protection law but it was repealed 2007.

States with smoker protection laws

StateYearCodeNotes
California2005CA LABOR CODE § 96(k) & 98.6Not specific to tobacco use, covers all lawful activities but has been interpreted by the courts as not creating any new substantive rights
Colorado1990CO REV. STAT. ANN § 24-34-402.5Not specific to tobacco use, covers all lawful activities
Connecticut2003CT GEN. STAT. ANN. § 31-40s
District of Columbia1993D.C. CODE ANN. § 7-1703.3
Illinois1987820 ILL. COMP. STAT. 55/5
Indiana2006IND. CODE §§ 22-5-4-1 et seq.
Kentucky1994KY REV. STAT. ANN. § 344.040
Louisiana1991LA REV. STAT. ANN. § 23:966
Maine1991ME REV. STAT. ANN. tit. 26, § 597[4]
Minnesota1992MINN. STAT. § 181.938
Mississippi1994MISS. CODE ANN. § 71-7-33
Missouri1992MO. REV. STAT. § 290.145
Montana1993MONT. CODE ANN. §§ 39-2-313 & 39-2-314
Nevada1991NEV. REV. STAT. § 613.333
New Hampshire1991N.H. REV. STAT. ANN. § 275:37-a
New Jersey1991N.J. STAT. ANN. §§ 34:6B-1 et seq.
New Mexico1991N.M. STAT. ANN. §§ 50-11-1 et seq.
New York1992[LABOR] LAW § 201-dNot specific to tobacco use, covers all lawful activities
North Carolina1991N.C. GEN. STAT. § 95-28.2Not specific to tobacco use, covers all lawful activities
North Dakota1993N.D. CENT. CODE §§ 14-02.4-01 et seq.
Oklahoma1991OKLA. STAT. ANN. tit. 40, § 500
Oregon1989OR. REV. STAT. §§ 659A.315 & 659A.885
Rhode Island2005R.I. GEN. LAWS § 23-20.10-14
South Carolina1991S.C. CODE ANN. § 41-1-85
South Dakota1991S.D. CODIFIED LAWS § 60-4-11
Tennessee1990TENN. CODE ANN. § 50-1-304
Virginia1989VA. CODE ANN. § 2.2-2902
West Virginia1992W. VA. CODE § 21-3-19
Wisconsin1991WIS. STAT. §§ 111.31 et seq
Wyoming1992WYO. STAT. ANN. §§ 27-9-101 et seq.

External links

Notes and References

  1. https://fortune.com/2020/01/02/u-haul-bans-hiring-smokers-21-states/ UHaul bans hiring smokers in 21 states
  2. http://www.heraldtribune.com/article/20080520/NEWS/805200406/1661 County: Smokers need not apply
  3. http://www2.hernandotoday.com/content/2010/apr/16/162137/city-wants-nip-tobacco-use-butt/ City wants to nip tobacco use in the butt
  4. http://legislature.maine.gov/statutes/26/title26sec597.html Maine Revised Statutes (Title 26: Labor and Industry, Chapter 7: Employment Practices, Subchapter 1: Conditions for Employment)