Atlantic City Casino Workers are locked in a high-stakes battle to eliminate a contentious rule that allows smoking inside casinos. The workers have escalated their case all the way to the New Jersey Supreme Court, hoping for a decisive ruling in their favor.
UAW and CEASE Challenge Verdict on Casino Smoking Loophole
United Automobile Workers (UAW) Region 9 and Casino Employees Against Smoking Effects (CEASE), representing the voices of casino employees, are dissatisfied with a recent judicial ruling, as noted by The New Jersey Monitor. These organizations argue vehemently that permitting smoking within casino premises puts workers’ lives on the line by exposing them to hazardous secondhand smoke.
After facing a setback in Judge Bartels’ courtroom, where it was ruled that the New Jersey Constitution doesn’t outright guarantee safety but merely the “pursuit and attainment” of it, the union has now decided to challenge this interpretation in the state’s highest court. They argue that the exception, which singles out casino workers from standard occupational safety norms, amounts to unjust special treatment for a powerful industry rooted in Atlantic City. Such an exception, they assert, is in direct conflict with the constitutional principles espoused by the state.
The crux of Bartels’ judgment hinged on Atlantic City’s unique legislative standing, permitting lawmakers to regulate gambling activities, including creating certain exemptions. However, the lawsuit claimants maintain that this carve-out unfairly subjects casino workers to conditions that could compromise their health, challenging the notion that such legal flexibilities should supersede the constitutional right to a safe work environment. They contend that casino employees deserve the same smoke-free air as all other workers in the state.
Casino Association Foresees Job Losses Amid Legislative Efforts to Ban Smoking
On the flip side, entities opposing a smoking ban, including the Casino Association of New Jersey, caution that removing this exemption could significantly dent casino revenues, potentially triggering job losses. They argue that smokers may migrate to casinos in neighboring states where smoking is still permitted, metaphorically suggesting that the house might lose its earnings to rival establishments.
The court has pondered over these economic concerns, acknowledging the potential impact on tax revenues and overall economic activity generated by casinos. However, casino workers argue passionately that financial arguments should not eclipse their fundamental rights to a healthful workplace atmosphere.
Efforts to eradicate smoking in casinos via legislative pathways have seen bipartisan backing yet continue to stall in the state legislature. Some legislators have floated the idea of compromising by designating enclosed smoking areas within casinos, but this proposition faces resistance from health advocacy groups.
Republican Assemblyman John DiMaio and other supporters of the ban emphasize that this issue transcends partisan politics, aiming squarely at protecting the well-being of workers and their families. With backing from both sides of the aisle, proponents of the ban ardently hope for legislative action soon, especially given that New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy has committed to signing any bill that eliminates smoking in casinos should it reach his desk.
