Unemployment sucks, and with jobs scarce they take what they can get. They should not be forced to breathe stale smoke 8 hours a day, simply because they work in a resturant.
While I agree that unemployment sucks, there is no right to work. People know what they get into and make their choice. There are some non smoking restaurants by choice. I have no problem with that whatsoever.
I have a problem with
1. Public health lobbies in general.
2. Big government.(That's the real key)
As a gunowner, I know what's next.
OSHA's Indoor Air Quality (IAQ) Action Into Smoking Regulation
Click here for [Timeline of Action - a 12 year review]
PRIOR TO DECEMBER 2001
Q. What's the status of OSHA's proposal for a regulation on indoor air
quality and environmental tobacco smoke, otherwise known as
second-hand smoke?
A. OSHA's April 5, 1994 proposal on indoor air quality evoked the largest public response
in the agency's history, with more the 100,000 comments received when the comment
period closed in August 1995. Hearings began September 20, 1994 and ran until March
13, 1995, with more than 400 witnesses testifying. The post hearing comment period
ended January 16, 1996. At this time, OSHA is continuing to review the comments and
testimony from concerned Americans before proceeding. No target date has been
established for a final determination on the issue.
DECEMBER 2001
OSHA withdrawal of its Indoor Air Quality proposal
[Click HERE to read Action on Smoking and Health's (ASH) remarks (please read between the lines -- OSHA wasn't convinced) concerning their involvement in petitioning for this action to begin with, their lawsuit and their dismissal of this suit which has brought the book to close on this chapter in their never-ending quest to regulate behavior by using federal agencies to impose their will. OSHA caught on, thankfully]
INDOOR AIR QUALITY
AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Labor.
ACTION: Withdrawal of Proposal
SUMMARY: OSHA is withdrawing its Indoor Air Quality proposal and terminating the rulemaking proceeding. In the years
since the proposal was issued, a great many state and local governments and private employers have taken action to curtail
smoking in public areas and in workplaces. In addition, the portion of the proposal not related to environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) received little attention during the rulemaking proceedings, and much of that consisted of commenters calling into
question significant portions of the proposal. As a result, record evidence supporting the non-ETS portion of the proposal is
sparse.
Withdrawal of this proposal will also allow the Agency to devote its resources to other projects. The Agency¹s current
regulatory priorities, as set forth in the Regulatory Agenda, include a number of important occupational safety and health
standards. This notice does not prelude any agency action that OSHA may find to be appropriate in the future.
DATES: The withdrawal is effective [insert date of publication in the Federal Register].
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bonnie Friedman, Director, OSHA Public Affairs Office, Occupational
Safety and Health Administration, Room N-3647, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington,
D.C. 20210; Telephone (202) 693-1999; FAX (202) 693-1634.
Authority and Signature
This document was prepared under the direction of John L. Henshaw, Assistant Secretary of Labor of Occupational Safety and health, U.S. Department of Labor.
It is issued pursuant to section 6(b) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970
(84 Stat. 1594, 29 U.S.C. 655) and 29 C.F.R. 1911.18.
Signed at Washington, D.C. this ________ of December 2001.
________________________
John L. Henshaw
Assistant Secretary of Labor