The benefits to smoke free restaurants

The issue of smoking in restaurants is a difficult one: for restaurateurs because they (at least seemingly) can't satisfy both factions of the public, and for nonsmokers because the scope of their lifestyle is often restricted to smoke-free places.

However, this latter fact is what has made smoke-free restaurants so profitable. No matter how much money an operator may put into separating the two factions, nonsmokers will continue to gravitate toward 100% smoke-free eateries, and sales will continue to dwindle for the smoky restaurant.

Restaurant operators are not totally to blame. For far too long, society itself has tolerated a product which, when enjoyed by its user, disperses toxic chemicals into the air that either irritate or disable nearby non-users. Simply, nonsmokers are no longer willing to tolerate it, and they go elsewhere.

The misjudgment is with operators who insist on not losing even one smoker, no matter what the health risks to employees. However, the costs of not making the move can be higher than doing so.

We estimate that every smoking customer will, over time, chase away five nonsmoking customers. Of course, the smokers keep returning and the nonsmokers do not, so restaurateurs are left with a false sense of where their majority customer base really is. The smaller the restaurant, the higher the price they will pay, but they all pay a price.

Historically, the tobacco industry has done an excellent job of convincing restaurant operators that since 25% of the population are smokers, going smoke-free would cost them 25% -- even 30% -- of their business. Clearly erroneous, but it is easy to see why operators would balk at making such a drastic change.

But why isn't the restaurant operator equally afraid of losing the 75% who do not smoke? Because rather than complain, these folks just quietly slip away to cleaner air down the street. Operators see the smokers return; but they do not see the nonsmokers who stay away.

Who is the wiser?

By allowing smoking at all, many restaurateurs have painted themselves into a corner by unwittingly catering to a declining population of smokers while those who are smoke free are expanding their marketplace.

Operators who themselves smoke, and even some who don't but have smoker lungs because of their work environment, seem extraordinarily slow at getting the message.

Fortunately, increasing numbers of operators are understanding the health and financial benefits of being smoke-free. Even operators who smoke, but nonetheless put good business judgments ahead of personal habits, are making the switch.

If not becoming smoke-free, many restaurateurs are going to great costs to try to separate the smokers -- while simply going smoke free would cost zero dollars. Clean air can be tolerated by everybody!

Depending on the extent to which they recirculate the smoky air through the nonsmoking section, they may or may not reduce the ire of the nonsmoker. (They need to know, however, that providing smoking rooms and sections increases the risk of the staff who serve the smokers. This new concentration of smoke in the air will significantly increase worker health risks, even for the smoking staff. To their own habit they must add 1-2 packs of cigarettes from "other people's" smoke, and that's the increased health risk they experience.)

The facts are clear: if restaurants go smoke free the right way*, they will at least retain their current level of business, and will often increase it. Maybe only by 3-5%, but an increase nonetheless. No city with a smoke free ordinance, after studying the taxes paid by restaurants, has reported a decrease in restaurant revenues.

76% of Wisconsin adults do not smoke, and that number is growing.
20-30% of smokers prefer smoke-free dining (Gallop Poll).
Most other smokers will acquiesce to the smoke-free eatery at the request of their friends or family.
Only 2-3% of the population are die-hard smokers who would actually avoid a smoke-free restaurant.
For every smoker a restaurant might lose, they stand to gain two nonsmokers in return. (That's a pretty good trade, and one that is substantiated by the restaurant industry's own polls.)
Waitresses, who work in restaurants which allow smoking, have four times the lung cancer risk and nearly three times the heart disease risk as do women in other occupations (per a University of California - San Francisco study).
Since 1992, the number of smoke-free restaurants in Wisconsin has grown from 65 to well over 2000 today. Why would these restaurants remain smoke free, were it not profitable?

In over 200 U.S. communities and three states, smoke free ordinances have been implemented without a loss of restaurant business. Indeed, most smokers do not quit eating in their favorite restaurant when it goes smoke free, they just quit smoking in it.

What is the right way to convert?

In all of our discussions with restaurant operators, one thing stands out loud and clear: those went smoke free quietly did not fare as well as those who did so with a splash.
If they simply hung a sign saying "We are now smoke-free," the only people who knew about it were their current customers. While they may lose a handful of these folks, they will usually regain the losses as word slowly filters out that they are now smoke free.

But this is a foolish waste of time and revenues. Why wait even one day? They should hang a large banner on the building saying "Enjoy Smoke-Free Dining." They should boldly print it in every ad, build it up in radio ads and seek out talk-show formats.

Why not tell the world? Why keep it quiet until the smokers reach the door? Why avoid getting the word to the people who would be attracted by it? Even if they are just passers-by who notice the banner, they are new customers who otherwise wouldn't exist!

Some operators erroneously believe that by doing it quietly, they will offend fewer smokers. But those who will be offended will be offended no matter how it is done. The secret is an affirmative action to replace the 2-3% of smokers even before they are lost.

When operators are bold about their new policy, word gets out in record time. They will begin seeing growth in three areas:

(1) Old customers who were previously chased away by the smoke will begin returning to their once-favorite eatery;

(2) new customers will be attracted from the competitor down the street who still allows smoking, and

(3) nonsmokers who have avoided eating out because of the smoke problem will start venturing out.

Its a win-win situation. Especially for the lungs and cash register.

Jack E. Lohman
Founder
Wisconsin Initiative on Smoking and Health
www.wish-wi.org

(*A booklet is available from WISH that helps increase profits when making the smoke-free conversion.)

Smoke-free Restaurants:

Profits or Peril?

by: Jack E. Lohman, Director

Wisconsin Initiative on Smoking and Health

Copies of the complete booklet may be obtained by email

Sitting in a nonsmoking section is like swimming in the non chlorinated end of a swimming pool.

The health and financial benefits, and how to
maximize profits when making the conversion.

In 1992 we began collecting the names of restaurants that were smoke-free, and our first "dining guide" began with a grand total of 65 restaurants. We interviewed many of those operators and found an exciting parallel: rarely did a restaurant lose business when it removed the ashtrays, and when it did it was only a temporary dip. The majority of operators reported that revenues either remained the same or increased slightly.

As we took these success stories to other operators, they slowly began making the same decision, and today we have over 2000 in the state.

When we talk to restaurant operators, roughly 70% want to eliminate smoking in their business. Many want the government to do it, partly to level the playing field to protect against losses and partly to remove themselves as the bad guy.

However, smoke-free is more popular by a 4:1 ratio, so why wait for the government to act and lose the opportunity to beat your competitor to the punch? Why not take advantage of an idea that has proven to increase profits? Why wait another day to reduce the workplace hazard and anti-marketing effects of second-hand smoke when you can do it and increase sales today?

[The main reason the 70% don't convert on their own is because of the unfounded fear of lost sales, and in some cases they have old customers they don't want to offend. But these concerns are unfounded.]

The trick is to go smoke free while maximizing profits and offending the fewest number of smokers. Keep in mind that most of your smokers will understand your obligation to reduce major workplace hazards and will remain long after the ash trays have been removed. You'll be pleasantly surprised.

Note: being smoke free does not offset lousy food! Many nonsmokers still patronize smoky restaurants with good food (although less often today). So, why would it stand that smokers will stay away from a smoke-free restaurant with good food?

It doesn't. Smokers don't quit eating in their favorite restaurant when it goes smoke free, they just quit smoking in it. Even 20-30% of smokers prefer smoke free dining, and most of those remaining will acquiesce to nonsmoking restaurants with their friends and family. That smokers are still an unyielding population is simply not true.

In every patron survey that we've seen taken by restaurant operators, the numbers are the same:

88% of patrons range from adamant nonsmokers to indifferent smokers,
9% would not be happy with the decision but would not necessarily stay away, and
only 3% are die-hard smokers who claim they will never return (some will never return, but so what?).

Even more important than those numbers are the answers to the following question:

New health studies show that waitresses have almost 4 times the lung cancer risk and over twice the heart disease risk when working in restaurants that allow smoking. Given the significant health risks second-hand smoke poses to our employees, if we were to go smoke free would you:

___ Eat here more frequently?

___ Eat here about the same?

___ Eat here less frequently?

[Note that two significant groups are missing from this survey: the nonsmoking customers you once had but have no more, and your competitor's patrons who will come over after you convert. Still, the numbers will come out in favor, and after conversion old customers will be the first to return.]

Ask the experts: Your customers!

The responses to the second option should be ignored. What matters is the difference between options 1 and 3. If the first exceeds the third by even one percentage point, the results can only mean one thing: a gain in business! Consistent with the National Restaurant Association's own polls, the numbers are roughly:

56% will eat there more frequently
27% will eat there less frequently

No matter how you cut it, that's a 2:1 advantage for smoke free. It is not unreasonable to expect that for every smoker you lose, you can gain two nonsmokers. [Most business people will accept that trade any day.]

Successes in the smoke-free world are everywhere. The reason: the ratio of nonsmokers (76%) to smokers (24%) is an overwhelming 3:1. One is an increasingly bigger pie to draw from and has fewer smoke-free competitors, while the other is a declining marketplace.

Which operator is the smarter? Being smoke free makes good business sense, even if you are a smoker yourself.

Going smoke free must be well planned

Importantly, if you go smoke-free quietly, only your current customers will know about it. Even your old customers that you previously lost because of tobacco smoke problems will be unaware of your new smoke-free policy. Don't keep it a secret!

To regain your old customers and get new ones from your smoky competitors, you must tell the world about your new smoke-free policy. Advertise it. Place signs in the windows - the larger the better. Even a banner across the front of your building, and a message on your marquee. Don't underestimate this vital step!

Deception will backfire

We have seen some operators purposely omit their smoke-free policy from their ads and coupons in the hope that when smokers are told at the door they will not turn away. Perhaps some won't, this time. But if they are of the few strong objectors, they'll not be back again anyway.

Don't lose your opportunity to attract the population who cares about dining in a smoke free setting! As mentioned before, 88% of the population either favor smoke free dining, or are indifferent to it. Why miss this group with your ads simply to attract the small percentage of smokers who might stay after they get to the front door? It doesn't make sense.

It surprises us that some operators fear that advertising a smoke free policy would turn away smokers, when the smokers you'd lose will be lost anyway. If you do it right, you'll replace them with nonsmokers even before they are gone.

We've also seen a few restaurants go belly up and, to the day they closed the doors, have refused to give smoke-free a try. That's not real smart. What would they have to lose?

Astute operators know a month or two in advance when they'll have to close the doors. But how many will say "Gee, I've got nothing to lose. Why don't I give this dumb idea a try. Even if an increase doesn't occur, or doesn't save me, I can use the experience on my next venture." Why has not one operator (that we know of) tried this last-ditch strategy?

A shortage of help?

We often hear that "most waitresses smoke," and that "help is hard to find." Could it be that smoky restaurants are severely limiting their workforce to the 24% of the population who smoke, and that nonsmoking workers avoid smoky restaurant jobs? Indeed that is the case.

Smoke free restaurants have significant advantages and can attract the best of the workers. There is clearly a savings associated with this benefit, as well as a savings due to the lower absenteeism rates of nonsmokers.

First things first - Restaurant Worker Risks!

Don't ignore the facts, even restaurant operators face these high risks. For operators who smoke, the added tobacco concentration places them at even greater risk than that which their habit creates!

According to a study by Michael Siegel, M.D., M.P.H., University of California in San Francisco and later published by the Center for Disease Control:

Restaurant environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) is about 3-5 times higher than typical workplace exposure (which adds both the smoke of the worker with the smoke of the patrons).
Restaurant employees' ETS exposure is about 8-20 times higher than domestic exposure (where a member of the family smokes).
The most heavily exposed restaurant workers inhale the benzo(a)pyrene equivalent of actively smoking 1 to 2 packs of cigarettes per day.
A University of California study shows that waitresses have the highest mortality of any female occupational group. Compared to all other women, they have almost 4 times the expected lung cancer mortality and 2 1/2 times the expected heart disease mortality rate.
Preliminary evidence suggests that waiters and waitresses have about a 50-90% increased risk of lung cancer that is most likely attributable to restaurant tobacco smoke exposure.
The mutagenic potency of restaurant air is 5-10 times that of "high risk" industrial workplace air.

Note 1: Restaurant air contains six times the carbon monoxide that you'd inhale standing in the middle of California's busiest freeway! While the health risks alone are compelling reasons to convert, increased sales and profits can be had for those who convert today. Don't wait.

Note 2: Tavern owners who have many multiples higher levels of tobacco smoke in their work environment should be very concerned. These are employee "class action lawsuits" waiting to happen. This industry needs a major overhaul of its thinking on tobacco smoke.

The Many Benefits of Smoke Free

Nonsmokers do not linger for coffee refills.
Patron turnover is faster.
Nonsmokers will more frequently stay to enjoy desert or an after-dinner drink.
Nonsmokers will not get angry and walk out because of delays getting a smoke-free table.
No more lost or broken ashtrays.
Cigarette burns on furniture and carpets are eliminated.
Curtains, walls, floors and upholstery need fewer cleanings and replacements.
Reservations and seating are simplified with only one class of seating, and no single employee feels shortchanged by his/her table assignment.
Restaurants do not become teenage smoking dens or hangouts.
Employee absenteeism is reduced, and employee productivity is increased.
The risks of a devastating fire are substantially reduced, likely reducing insurance premiums. (14.2% of restaurant fires are caused by smoking, per National Fire Prevention Association).
Patron and employee liability risks are reduced.
Patrons and employees alike will be much happier, and they will dine out more frequently as a result (36% more, according to the Madison, WI survey).

For the same reason you wouldn't allow someone to spray radon or asbestos dust in your restaurant, you shouldn't allow the dispersement of toxic tobacco carcinogens.

The successful way to go smoke free:

Take a survey of your customers in advance to show them that they are part of the decision. Let them know that you are only considering this move in order to reduce the health hazards for your employees, who must breathe the environmental air 40 hours per week.

Ask them if they would eat there "more often, less often, or about the same" if you become 100% smoke free.

Once decided, give two weeks advance notice with a sign at the door and on table tents. Let the idea settle in.
Advertise. Advertise. Advertise! (And, no, I'm not in the advertising business.)
In your ads or coupons, your smoke-free policy should be 80% as large as your restaurant name. Don't keep it a secret!
Send press releases to radio, TV and newspapers.
Run 10-second radio/TV spots touting your new smoke-free policy.
Get on radio talk shows, even if it creates controversy (but stress the health issues).
Call in to newspaper "sound off" columns.
Place a large banner on your storefront saying: "Smoke-Free Dining!"
Write a letter to the editor of your local paper explaining why you made this decision.
Let your smokers take home the ashtrays.
Have a "recycling" party to have fun with the idea.
Don't fear controversy. Promote it! The more people talking about it the better. Even the complaints from smokers will work in your favor. Let them sound off in the press and on radio; it'll further spread the word.
Show unhappy smokers the health statistics leading to your decision, and ask for their understanding. (Available from WISH)
Never, never, never make this a smoker versus nonsmoker issue. It is an employee health issue!
Always relate your decision to the safety of your employees (rather than the comfort of your nonsmoking patrons). Smokers can empathize with the health risks of your staff, but they will be offended if they feel that you've chosen nonsmoker business over smoker business.
Although many smokers may prefer smoke-free dining, don't needlessly upset the other smokers. Smart planning will let you save all but a few of the heaviest smokers (the few that created most of the smoke anyway).

Don't get hung up on the potential loss of the die-hard smokers who complain and complain. They will try to wear you down, even when they are the problem in the first place. We estimate that every smoker, in repeated visits, will ultimately chase away five nonsmokers. That's not a very good trade.

Operators have historically been fooled by the ratio of their smoker versus nonsmoker patrons. Remember that it is not the smoker who is being offended by the air quality, it's the nonsmoker. The smokers will continue coming back, and it is this population that the operator mostly "sees." But operators fail to see the nonsmokers who quietly slip away to cleaner air and never return. Thus, operators are left with a false sense of who their market really is.

By virtue of the smoking policy, the smokers continue to return and continue to chase away other nonsmokers. To the detriment of their cash register, operators inadvertently drive their market toward the declining 24% of the smokers. Not a very good long-term strategy.

Only a state law or local ordinances banning smoking in restaurants will save them from being ultimately overrun by this deadly product and future employee lawsuits. Despite the restaurant association's position, operators should unite behind universal laws banning this workplace hazard.

Why not have a clean air environment that 100% of your patrons can breathe? Why exclude any patrons at all?

When we hear smoke-free restaurant operators
boast that business is up, and operators who
allow smoking complain that revenues are down,
it is not hard to see which way the trend is going.

If you are really looking for
an excuse, try one of these....

We're too small to have a nonsmoking section!

Think about it. If your restaurant is really that small, should you even allow smoking at all?

The smaller the restaurant, the less air space there is to dissipate the smoke, and the more nonsmoking customers you will chase away. Guaranteed!

Remember: Nonsmokers represent 74.9% of the adult population. Why limit your marketplace to the 25% who smoke and the few nonsmokers who don't mind being around smokers?

Why not expand your market to the 74.9% who are nonsmokers, plus the fourth of the smokers who prefer smoke free dining themselves, and the few smokers who will gripe but continue coming back because they like your food?

Don't bury your head in the sand on this issue. Do your math. That's 88% of the market!

Smoke-free restaurants aren't doing so well!

That's exactly what the tobacco industry would want you to believe, but it's not true.

In Wisconsin, we've grown from 65 smoke-free restaurants in Wisconsin in 1992, to over 2000 today! Do you think these operators would continue being smoke free if it weren't profitable?

Virtually all of the smoke-free restaurants in Wisconsin have reported unaffected or increased revenues as a result of removing the ash trays. Some have experienced significant increases (when they go smoke free with a splash). Only a handful have reported problems, and these could have been avoided with smarter planning. Even if sales remain the same, a decrease in cleaning costs will still yield an increase in profits.

I can't afford to lose even one customer!

Wrong! You can afford to lose any customer who chases away other customers on a continuing basis. Smokers chase away nonsmokers, and as smokers return they chase away even more nonsmokers. A serious, repetitive cycle sets into place, sometimes resulting in closing the doors.

Why do restaurant operators fear losing even one smoker, yet they can ignore the many nonsmokers lost because of that smoker? We estimate that, because of this repetitive cycle, each smoking customer will eventually cost the restaurants five nonsmokers in exchange. Is it a wise decision to allow this trend to continue?

I'll win my smoke-free competitor's smokers!

Smart. For every smoker you get of his, he'll get two of your nonsmokers. The math doesn't seem to be in your favor. And, what's going to happen when your customer base is 100% smokers?

In Madison (WI) on State Street, as more and more restaurants went smoke free, the hard-core smokers migrated to the few eateries that would still allow them. But then, these owners started to lose even smokers who could no longer stand it -- until they, too, joined the smoke free trend. While they did ultimately switch, it cost them business before they made the conversion. There is no reason to let that happen to you.

I can't afford to offend any of my smokers!

Now come on. Better to ask, can you afford to offend the 76% of the population who are nonsmokers? Think about it.

First, you're assuming that all smokers will be offended by a smoke-free policy, when that is not even close to being correct. About one-forth of smokers prefer smoke-free dining, and a large number will choose the nonsmoking section with their friends and family. Only 2-3% of the entire population are hard-core smokers who will stay away from a smoke-free eatery. And for every smoker you might lose, you stand to gain two non-smokers in their place. That kind of math is on your side. Don't let that 2-3% destroy your logic or your health.

Secondly, smokers are becoming increasingly aware of the problems created by their tobacco habit. They can't smoke in movies, retail stores, theaters or planes, and they understand why they are finding fewer restaurants in which to smoke. Besides, most smokers don't quit eating in their favorite restaurant when it goes smoke free, they just quit smoking in it.

Most of my customers are smokers!

First, that's probably not correct, but if it is, you are in even deeper trouble than are most of your colleagues. If you have allowed your smoking clientele to take over your establishment, you and your staff are at greater health risk than ever before. Under normal circumstances, waitresses are only at 3 1/2 times the risk of developing lung cancer. What is it with a higher ratio of smokers?

Also important, if you have lost that many nonsmokers already, you should be poised to regain a greater number of them when you do go smoke-free! And a number of your smoky competitor's patrons, as well.

We want to accommodate all of our customers!

That's what the tobacco industry wants you to do, too, and Philip Morris and R.J. Reynolds even provide decals for your doors to show your customers how "accommodating" you are to smokers.

But don't kid yourself into believing that this will work in your favor. What smokers and nonsmokers choose to breathe into their lungs are mutually exclusive. One wants clean air; the other wants tobacco smoke. You cannot satisfy them both.

As well, these signs will actually lead to increased smoking in your establishment (exactly what the industry wants), with a resulting decrease in nonsmoking patrons. Don't let the tobacco industry trick you into putting their profits ahead of your own. Many nonsmokers will avoid (even boycott) restaurants that encourage smoking with these tobacco-industry signs.

My customers don't complain about the smoke!

Few will. Only 1 in 25 nonsmokers will speak out when offended by tobacco smoke. Most nonsmokers just quietly walk away to a nonsmoking restaurant -- and the losing operator never knows why they've left. Silent losses, indeed.

However, since some smokers complain when not allowed to light up, operators are often left with the false impression that they are satisfying more people by allowing smoking and reducing complaints, when in fact they have only reduced the number of people to complain.

The owner is a smoker!

That may be true. But it's our guess that the owner is also (or wants to be) a good business person, and if removing the ashtrays increased revenues, that owner would satisfy his or her smoking habit outside.

Besides, there is only one thing worse than having a patron light up and ruin your meal: it's having the owner or an employee do it. Even if smoking is allowed in a restaurant, it is absolutely foolhardy for owners or employees to contribute to the problem and themselves chase away nonsmokers.

Smokers have rights, too!

Nobody has the right to disperse into the air a known toxic substance for others to breathe regardless of how long the practice has been tolerated in our society. You wouldn't let non-smokers disperse radon, asbestos or any other annoying substance into the air; why must you allow smokers to do it?

To the contrary, nonsmokers (but mostly, your employees) do have the right to breathe clean, safe air. That right is guaranteed by both state and federal laws, and restaurant operators will see increasing numbers of lawsuits from employees if they fail to address this safety issue.

Importantly, employees must breathe the smoky air 40 hours per week, and the cumulative effect can be deadly. It is precisely because of employee safety that most smokers understand why you've made the decision to go smoke free. Few, if any at all, will challenge a decision based on employee safety.

I can't afford to make any changes!

Can you really afford not to?

If things are not going well, being smoke free will likely make them better. It could even make the difference between staying in business and closing the doors. Ironically, we've seen several restaurants close their doors, while at the same time refusing to try something new, like a smoke-free policy, to turn things around. Does that make any business sense? Is it any wonder that the failure rate for restaurants is so high?

If business is already good, are you not open to making it better? We've even had some say that "business is too good," and they couldn't stand to make it any better! Well, then, how about just making it safer without losing any business?

I'm waiting for it to become law!

Why wait until the playing field is leveled, when you can capitalize on the trend and gain a competitive edge before everybody else is doing it too?

The restaurants in Madison that led the smoke-free trend, long before the ordinance was passed, have developed a loyal following that will remain even after the ordinance levels the playing field.

You, too, can be a leader and capitalize on this profitable trend. Don't be the last one to make the move.

The National Restaurant Association findings...

According to a February 12, 1993 memo from the NRA to its members, citing a New York Times/CBS poll regarding smoking in restaurants:

A full 67% of those polled favor a complete ban on smoking in all public places -- including 39% of current smokers, 74% of former smokers, and 78% of those who never smoked.

According to a study fielded by the National Restaurant Association in January 1993,

56% of adults said they would be more likely to go to a restaurant that voluntarily banned smoking as opposed to one that continued to permit smoking, and
26% would be less likely to go to a restaurant that voluntarily banned smoking as opposed to one that continued to permit smoking.

Now plug in your calculator!

If you are not smoke free, you are losing business you need not lose. While the above illustrates a 215% greater (56% vs. 26%) preference for smoke free dining, even if the former exceeded the latter by only 1%, it would translate to an increase in sales!!! For every smoker who would eat there less frequently, two nonsmokers will take their place.

That results in a gain no matter what language you speak.

And our favorite.....

We've got to be fair to everybody

Is it really "fair" to force nonsmokers (and your employees) to breathe second-hand tobacco smoke, just so you can be "fair" to smokers? Is it fair to force non-smokers to sit on the patio, so smokers can light up inside? Isn't maximum fairness providing everybody clean, safe air to breathe while enjoying their dinner?

Smoke-free Bars?
Bars with nonsmoking sections?

Not out of the realm of possibility...

For far too long, restaurant operators have assumed that banning smoking in their eatery would cost them business. Just as most smokers don't quit eating in their favorite restaurant when it goes smoke-free, the same holds true for bars. Smokers don't have to light up everywhere they go -- they just do when they are allowed to.

Bar owners have traditionally felt the same concern, perhaps even more so because it seems that a large percentage of bar customers are smokers. And they are, because the owners force it that way.

Nonsmokers are not necessarily non drinkers, they just seem that way because they avoid smoky bars. Most bar owners have no idea how much business they are losing as a result, because they only see the smokers who return and do not see the nonsmokers who stay away.

According to a San Jose State University study, on a "per person" basis, smokers consume twice the level of alcohol than do nonsmokers. But, numerically, nonsmokers outnumber smokers by 3:1.

Think about that:

Using the 3:1 numerical advantage of nonsmokers, for every two beers consumed by one smoker, three beers are consumed by three nonsmokers. No matter how you cut it, the nonsmoker market is greater than the smoker market! As a group, nonsmokers consume 60% of the total alcohol market. That is a significant oversight being made by most bar and tavern owners.

Moreover, owners must recognize the dire shortage of smoke-free bars in most, if not all, cities. Taking advantage of the larger nonsmoker marketplace and advertising your new smoke-free bar will surely draw nonsmoking patrons away from your competitors, and your food sales should increase even more. Nonsmokers are desperate for good places to go where they will not be assaulted by tobacco smoke.

The fact is, smokers chase away nonsmokers, both in the bar and restaurant settings. As the smoker returns, the cycle repeats and even more nonsmokers are lost. This creates the significant imbalance bar operators see between smokers and nonsmokers. We estimate that every smoker will, over time, chase away five nonsmokers!

The attrition rate of nonsmokers is high and the effects harmful and costly. It makes no sense to let this continue.

Any smoke can be detrimental....

Nonsmokers have various degrees of sensitivity. Some are totally disabled, and cannot breathe in its presence. Some have asthma. Some are only sensitive and develop watery eyes, sneeze or get stuffed-up heads. Some are neither, but are simply offended by the mere presence of smoke in the air.

Nonetheless, everybody in these categories have made a life choice to not breathe tobacco smoke, and they go out of their way to patronize nonsmoking facilities.

That leaves the bars with the smokers, the few nonsmokers who are indifferent about smoke, and those who have just quit smoking themselves and thus are not yet bothered by the smell.

But the majority of nonsmokers are a vast marketplace that smoky bars and restaurants will simply lose as more and more places go smoke free. In fact, WISH's goal is to divert as many nonsmokers from smoky restaurants and bars as we can, and send them to smoke-free establishments instead. We hope to create a major market shift toward smoke-free restaurants in order to give owners of smoky restaurants financial reason to change.

When smoke is even allowed in a building, it permeates the air and patrons in the nonsmoking section still go home with residual tobacco odor on their clothes and in their hair. When nonsmokers get home, they know all too well that they've been in a smoky restaurant, and they won't go back.

Just one cigarette from a discourteous smoker is enough to engulf 100 nearby non-smokers. The trend is firm. Most nonsmokers will favor and patronize the totally smoke-free facilities before settling on one with a smoky atmosphere. Smoky places will be their last resort.

Importantly, changes in bar smoking policies can be made without sacrificing any of your smoker business. Although it might be gutsy to make a "bar-only" setting smoke-free, many have done so and enjoyed an increase in profits. If in doubt, contact Kathie Bundie at the Stagedoor Saloon in Manitowoc, WI at (920) 684-5338. She reports great success.

Smoke-Free restaurants with attached bars

Most bars that are a part of a restaurant can and should be smoke free. If an operator determines that being smoke-free will increase the food marketplace, going smoke free in the bar adds one more service to the nonsmoking patrons. Restaurant owners whose business increases only moderately when going smoke free, are very likely not receiving the full impact of their new policy because they left the bar smoky.

After getting new nonsmokers into the restaurant for dinner, many of these patrons avoid the smoky bar -- both while waiting for their table and for after-dinner drinks. It seems a waste to see these nonsmokers walk past the bar on their way out, maybe even going to a smoke-free bar elsewhere in town.

Bar-Only settings

Oh, you say, most of your bar customers are smokers? Well, that's your fault!

Even without going totally smoke free, bar owners can increase sales by tapping the vast nonsmoker marketplace. And yes, even without giving up the "heavy smoker" marketplace, if they really want to keep it.

How? By separating the bar into smoking and nonsmoking sections and exhausting the smoke from the smoking section and drawing the fresh air into the nonsmoking section.

Read this: Not ventilation or filtering or smoke eaters or recirculation, EXHAUST!

Yes, this will increase heating and ventilation costs, but the increased nonsmoker marketplace should more than offset it. Everybody will be pleased with this arrangement, even the smokers.

There is no good reason why smokers need 100% of your bar area, and most would rather have the nonsmokers away from them anyway.

Employer liability?

Note, however, that even if the above does satisfy smokers and nonsmokers, it does not remove the significant health risk experienced by the staff. If you thought the air supply was bad in the restaurant setting, brace yourself. It is probably triple that in the bar.

According to the University of California, restaurant environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) is about 3-5 times higher than typical workplace exposure; restaurant employees' ETS exposure is 8-20 times higher than "at home" exposure; the most heavily exposed restaurant workers inhale the benzo(a)pyrene equivalent of actively smoking 1 to 2 packs of cigarettes per day, and waitresses have the highest mortality of any female occupational group (with almost 4 times the lung cancer mortality and 2 1/2 times the expected heart disease mortality rate).

How does all of this translate to the bartender? Or to the owner who runs the bar?

We don't know the answers yet, but it certainly can't be good. And it sure could be a deadly mistake to ignore the issue just because you haven't developed lung cancer or emphysema yet.

For others views on the business effects, click here and here.

Prepared by
Jack E. Lohman
Founder and Director
Wisconsin Initiative on Smoking and Health
P.O. Box 27674
Milwaukee, WI 53227
414-541-9474
jlohman@execpc.com