Memorial Hospital Goes Smoke Free Save Email Print
Posted: 8:46 PM Sep 26, 2007
Last Updated: 9:25 AM Sep 27, 2007
Reporter: McKenzie Martin
Email Address: mmartin@kktv11news.com

A | A | A

Memorial Hospital announced this week that beginning January 1, 2008 the hospital will be completely tobacco free. This new policy means that employees will be prohibited from tobacco use during the workday.

Hospital officials say if an employee is caught smoking or there is suspicion that they've been smoking at some point during the workday they will be subject to disciplinary action.

The sixth floor of memorial hospital's parking garage is where employees can currently go to light up, soon that will no longer be the case.

"Can't go to the park, can't go off property, can't smoke during work hours," said Trisha Martinez, an employee at Memorial for the past 15 years.

A new policy effective January 1st prohibits employees from using tobacco during their workday on or off hospital property.

"I think it's taking away my right, I've been smoking for 48 years," said Kendrick Thomas.

Thomas says he'll quit his job before he quits smoking.

"That’s how strongly I feel about it, it's taking my constitutional rights away," Thomas said.

Martinez, an employee at memorial for the past 15 years agrees.

"What’s wrong is them coming out and writing up employees cause you came in smelling like cigarettes, that’s basically telling you what you can and can't do on your own time, that's wrong,” Martinez said.

Memorial spokesperson Chris Valentine says the decision was made with their patient’s health in mind.

"Memorial is trying to enforce a healthy community and healthy employees," he said.

Valentine says this new policy will be strictly enforced.

"The analogy I use is your not allowed to use alcohol on your lunch break and now you can't smoke or use tobacco products," said Valentine.

So for the next three months, these smokers will have to either try to quit or get used to going a full day smoke free.

At least 20 other hospitals in Colorado have adopted a similar policy.

More Stories
CO Marine Accused Of Desertion Gets Less-Than-Honorable Discharge

Developer Wants To Build Homes On White Acres

Durango Man Critically Hurt Saving Granddaughter

Bomb Threat at Middle School

Boulder Police Seek Help Identifying Underwear

Video Games Get Kids To Work Out At Local Gym

Palin Files Late Disclosure For Free Trips

Customer Spies Cook Carving Deer In PA Pizzeria

Post Your Comments
First Name:
Location:
Enter Comments: characters left
Email (optional):
Email will not be displayed on site. For station contact purpose only.
Read Comments
Comments are posted from viewers like you and do not always reflect the views of this station.
Posted by: Cortney on Oct 4, 2007 at 02:55 PM
Maybe they should concentrate on patient/staff relations. I'd rather smell "smoke" on a nurse than have to deal with her rude, impersonable attitude at my bedside. It seems more and more health care workers snotty and mean.

Posted by: I SMOKE Location: CSC on Oct 4, 2007 at 10:45 AM
I have been a smoker for 30 years. I know it's bad but it is my addiction. But I totally agree with the hospital. I know that Memorial is offering their employees help to quit smoking and if my company told me I could not smoke on their dime and offered me help to quit I would be all over that. I agree that this is for the patients and I have a 2 pound grandaughter in that NICU that I don't want around smoke smell. I know that there are other smells that can trigger a reaction but the hospital has to start somewhere so why not smoking? The only thing I have to say for the opposing side is, how is the hospital going to stop their patients from crossing the street to the tennis court to have a smoke??? If I can't smoke at a bar then why not a hospital.

Posted by: Jennifer Location: Colorado Springs on Oct 2, 2007 at 11:41 AM
So, the toxins from smoke can cling to your clothing for up to 15min.This can harm people that are sensitive to smoke and can cause adverse reactions.This is not to punish anyone it is to provide a safe and healthy environment for staff, patients, and community members.Maybe your not aware that smoking can kill you.How can Memorial promote wellness when it allows it's employees to smoke.What you do on your own time is your own business, but coming to work smelling of cigarettes is a violation of every dress code I've ever read.You are to maintain a clean appearance.This includes odor.I'm ashamed at the individuals that are so selfish they put their own needs before those of others.And dening a patient care because they smoke is for their own good.Smokers have more complications then non-smokers.It's a risk to be operated on.

Posted by: Jeanette on Oct 2, 2007 at 11:05 AM
I think this is a great idea. As a patient I notice when a person smells like cigarette smoke. It is offensive. I am an EMT. They teach you to not wear perfume, cologne, or any other hearvy smelling products, because they can offend patients. They can also make patients sick. This is the same principle. I for one don't want the people taking care of me to smell like an ashtray.

Posted by: todd Location: colorado springs on Oct 1, 2007 at 10:46 AM
are we in Russia or what? where are our civil rights? were they evacuated without my knowledge? I am a smoker and this absolutely crazy to infringe my rights on my own time. this an illegal drug we're talking about. the government makes alot of money on this product....

Posted by: Kate Location: Colorado Springs on Sep 30, 2007 at 10:07 PM
Good for them! I've had 2 babies at Memorial and I don't want to smell someone that stinks of smoke around me or my baby. It's disgusting. Not to mention that studies show that smokers take waaaay more breaks than the average worker! Go Memorial!

Posted by: db Location: Colorado Springs on Sep 29, 2007 at 12:28 AM
I agree with the ban. All a lung cancer patient needs is his doctor or nurse to come in smelling like smoke. This is not unconstitutional. Private companies can do what they like. The hospital is not a state entity. They do not have to follow the same rules that the federal/state government would have to. If I do not allow you to smoke in my home, I am not violating your constitutional rights. The people on this site making this lame argument do not know what their rights really are. If people do not like the rules, don't work there.

Posted by: Nora Location: CS on Sep 29, 2007 at 12:06 AM
Give me a break people. If my workplace told me they were banning Pepsi (my own personal addiction), I would get over it or leave at lunch time to drink it. It's not like you're going to die without a smoke--hmmm, but pretty sure you will with one.

Posted by: anonymous Location: colorado springs on Sep 28, 2007 at 09:52 PM
Good for Memorial! Until I stop seeing people throw their cigarette butts out all over the place I am in favor of any measure that is anti-smoking. I personnely think smokes should be $20 a pack. Use your ashtray.

Posted by: DJ Location: Colorado Springs on Sep 28, 2007 at 03:30 PM
Let's talk about drinking. How many people are killed each year in the Unisted States by drunk drivers? How many errors are made in hospitals by inebriated employees. Don't tell me it doesn't happen. Yet we as a nation of concerned citizens do nothing about alcohol consumption. By the way...drink also causes harm to the drinkers body that "OUR" insurance covers...just like for the smokers. Wake-Up america...when are you going to start looking at the drinkers. By the way is someone taking Memorial to court?

Posted by: Anonymous Location: colorado springs on Sep 28, 2007 at 02:57 PM
Good. If I'm going to be in a hospital not feeling well then I sure dont want to be around someone who has been smoking. That smell makes me sick to my stomache. Most smokers dont't realize how bad they smell. Not to mention, its outragously dangerous to smoke anywear near a hospial.

Posted by: Anonymous Location: Colorado Springs on Sep 28, 2007 at 02:12 PM
Ok, so I vote, oh yeah there was NO VOTE. Anyway as a customer of Memorial Hospital on many occasions, I would also like to see banned the unkept employees who smell anyway, because they don't care. Better supply mouthwash for those with bad breath also. I am subject to migraines so also ban the "deodorizers" used in the restrooms, etc. I myself have to cover my nose whenever I use them or suffer an instant migraine. Smoking is some peoples way of dealing with stress. Working in a hospital can be very stressful I would imagine. Why take away their right to deal with the stress in the way they wish? Completely unconstitutional! At some point, smokers need to start speaking very loudly or they will see all of their rights stripped way. Remember No Taxation without Representation? Well you've been taxed and stripped...when are you going to speak up?

Posted by: ANONYMOUS Location: COLO. SPRINGS on Sep 28, 2007 at 01:06 PM
I feel that this is an infringment on people's right. I am an ex-smoker and I would be very furious if I were still and was given this ruling. But I do also understand that patients (especially those with breathing disorders) can react with the smell of smoke. I am turned off by it myself (I never could smell it the same way when I was still a smoker), though it does not cause me harm. There should be some things available for the smokers. We do have soap and disinfectant hand cleaners for those coming from the restrooms. So we could have something for the smoker, ie: providing clothing spray and mouth spray/drops for those returning from a smoke break. I know, I know, we should not have to pay for them - but it could be provided to the employees at a wholesale cost and required to be used just as washing hands after using the bathroom facilities. Everyone needs to understand each others needs, feelings, health, and rights. You know the saying "until you have walked a day in my shoes."

Posted by: Elliott Location: Colorado Springs on Sep 28, 2007 at 11:12 AM
I think a lot of the focus is on the unhealthy effects of second hand smoke and that being the main reason. You also have to look at the smell being a main factor. Patients can be allergic to pretty much anything and I don't see this as different from a no cologne/perfume rule. Any of us who have worked on an asthmatic or other respiratory distress patient knows how fast their situation can deteriorate. The smell of cigarette smoke can set them off similar to other strong smells. Not every time but the liability is there. Does it suck for smokers? Absolutely! Just remember that we got in this business to take care of patients. Never forget your role as an advocate for them even if that means some personal sacrifice.

Posted by: Anonymous Location: Colorado Springs on Sep 28, 2007 at 09:44 AM
I am no longer shocked by some of the things that pass for "acceptable"! I agree with most of these posts here. Next thing you know we will be allowing employers to dictate what we can eat or drink! I know that cigarette smoke on a person does smell bad, but some things that people eat make them smell bad as well. Sounds to me like these employees couldn't even smoke in their own cars, let alone outdoors on their own time. Insane.

Posted by: ellen Location: illinois on Sep 28, 2007 at 08:45 AM
Last timeI looked, tobacco was still legal and until it is against the law to smoke then leave people alone. I agree with the comment that burgers, chips, fries, corn oil and othe "unhealthy" items will be next. What is in the vending machines? "Healthy lifestyle", please!

Posted by: Anonymous Location: colorado springs colorado on Sep 27, 2007 at 10:26 PM
We don't smoke in the hospital - we are smoking outside. If they take tobacco away because of health reasons - the cafeteria should not be serving french fries and cookies and donuts. What is the difference - Smokers die faster than obese people - therefore, the obese individuals are draining the health care funds at much more increased rates than smokers do. This just doesn't make any sense at all.

Posted by: Anonymous on Sep 27, 2007 at 08:42 PM
I defend it 100%. If you can't smoke at bar what makes you think you can smoke at a hospital? It infringes on other people's health, and it's about time they do something about it. I've worked at Memorial for years now, and it's by fault of the employees we can't have tabacco anymore anyway. Do you think it was the sneaking into the ambulance bay for a smoke that did it? Or was it from those who hid a chew in there lip while they worked? Who knows, but those people ruined for us all. Imagine coming to the hospital by ambulance and when you are being wheeled into the ER all you can smell is cigarette smoke. Or imagine an 88 year old woman getting her blood drawn by someone who reaks of smoke. Stop thinking about yourselves and start thinking about the patients. Isn't that why you are in this profession anyway?

Posted by: IMPRESSED! Location: California on Sep 27, 2007 at 05:48 PM
I think it is incredible when a health care provider is proactive in helping not only their patients, but their staff as well. I also think that the comparison of fat people, gambling and etc. is unfair. Obesity and gambling do not have a direct effect on the patients or staff members in a hospital, but 2nd hand smoke does. It kills! Especially when a patient's health is already compromised with sickness or disease. It is true, we are not allowed to show up to work under the influence of alcohol or drugs, so why should we be allowed to enter a health care facility with cancerous smoke enveloping us... Think about it, health care providers are there to make us well, it goes against their code of ethics to do otherwise. These are adults who have made an active choice to care for others. I do, however, think that the hospital should have some sort of well planned system for assisting their staff in overcoming their tobacco habit and that their policy should be a staff friendly one.

Posted by: John Location: Colorado Springs on Sep 27, 2007 at 04:57 PM
We are all being stripped of our rights, but we are all to nieve or blind to see it. This is totally unconstitutional and full of discrimination. You can focus on the family or focus on the fear. Either way it is wrong.

Posted by: Rod Location: Colorado Springs on Sep 27, 2007 at 04:52 PM
I feel that this new rule is just like an email I received a couple days ago about how to catch a pig, First you leave some food for a couple of days in the same place and when the pig gets used to it you put up a wall but keep feeding it, then in a couple of days you put up another wall and when the pig is used to it you put up another, then another and soon that pig has lost his freedom. This country is full of this type of deception!It is totally DISGUSTING. When are we all going to wake up and smell the coffee? We are all being dooped.

Posted by: Tracy Location: Colorado Springs on Sep 27, 2007 at 04:35 PM
I cannot believe the Department of Labor would agree with this. This is discrimination no matter how you look at it. If they are going to ban tobacco products because they aren't healty, then does that mean they are going to ban soda, chips, candy, red meat, carbs, fats, and everything else that is "unhealty"? Futhermore, who is Memorial Hospital to tell thier employees what is healty and what is not? Are they not all grown adults capable of making thier own decisions? Would everyone be so quick to ban smoking if the smoke smelled like roses or carnations regardless of the health risks? I don't think so. This is just stupid. Personally, I wouldn't be a bit surprised if come January 1, Memorial finds themselves shortstaffed.

Posted by: ex- smoker Location: colorado springs on Sep 27, 2007 at 01:08 PM
The officials have overstepped their bounds. This is unconstitutional, and I would look into a lawsuit from the labor board to tell employers what a break is defined as. This surely cannot be leagl and should not be tolerated. Are you telling me that a doctor who's worked a double shift cannot smoke? And then what happens if he get's called back in to work should the hospital deem it necessary to cover in the event of a city-wide crisis? Then what? You would see your employees making more mistakes and being more irratble. This just doesn't seem like it was thought all the way through. So what if other cities do it? I am getting tired of being a native of Colorado Springs. Even I, cannot defend this absurdity.

Posted by: Tamara Location: Colorado Springs on Sep 27, 2007 at 12:33 PM
Oh sure, It's easy to say this is unconstitutional. But, the real thing is that this is a hospital environment with people who are sick and need to get well. This isn't some other type of building. It's a hospital for crying out loud. That environment should be free from health hazards to all patients. This is a place where people are treated and surgeries are completed to make people well again. There's no denying that people who smoke wreak of tobacco. It's awful. Plus, it's a known fact that tobacco has poisons in it. This is not some friendly product people. It kills. Which, is another known fact. Also, second hand smoke kills. Which also happens to include the stuff that is lingering on your clothing, walls in buildings, materials in cars, fabric on chairs, etc. People have died from living in the same house with second hand smoke. To think that tobacco is a friendly, good product is false. It's an addictive product that affects others around you that don't smoke.

Posted by: Marie Location: Colorado Springs on Sep 27, 2007 at 12:18 PM
I think it's great. Yet, I have heard one sincere and honest complaint, if it's true. I heard that Memorial Hospital isn't offering to help pay for nicotine patches or such for their employees. If this is the case, I'm sure more employees would hop on board if Memorial offered these options to them at a low cost or no cost option. It also would have been nicer to give them a minimum of 6 months to quit instead of approx. 3 months. I, myself, don't smoke. But, know how hard it can be for someone to quit and wish that Memorial Hospital would have taken a more personal employee-oriented approach to all of this. Also, I believe that visitors should not be allowed to enter the hospital that smell of smoke, as well. Unless, there is an EMERGENCY situation & this person needs to be there, due to a family member being in critical condition, etc. Limiting it strictly to personnel seems a bit discriminating. A healthier hospital environment should mean all who enter should be smoke-free.

Posted by: Shannon Location: Colorado Springs on Sep 27, 2007 at 09:13 AM
So now employers (in this case the City)have the right to tell employees how to live their lives on their own time...then better pay those employees for their lunch hours because there private time has just become company time...how many more personal rights is our government going to allow US citizens to loose.

Posted by: BJC Location: C|S on Sep 27, 2007 at 06:05 AM
UNCONSTITUTIONAL...and I dont even smoke!!!

Posted by: Audrey Location: Brooklyn, NY on Sep 27, 2007 at 04:06 AM
This has nothing to do with patient health and all to do with persecution. And it's always easiest to persecute the people under your direct control (employees). I invite the hospital to declare that patient visitors who smoke will be denied entry. Really, what's the difference between the smoke smell on an employee and that of a visitor? Not declaring such an equal policy exposes the hospital for what it is... an island of govt. tyranny over its people over the largest public health fraud ever perpetrated on the public. Malice disguised as virtue. More sickening than any smoke. Audrey Silk NYC Citizens Lobbying Against Smoker Harassment (C.L.A.S.H.)

Posted by: Steve on Sep 26, 2007 at 11:38 PM
I am a local citizen of the Colorado Springs area with alot of concernes. This is the most rediculous thing I have ever heard of. I work in the medical feild and if the company I work for stated that my smelling like cigarette smoke affected my patients health I would call them a liar and challenge them to prove it. Being exsposed to smoke and smelling it are two very different things. I have smoked for 17 years now and this is an infringment on the rights of smokers. I feel as though Memorial hospital has become an Comunist entity with in the boarders of the United States. In fact I fought and was injured in combat for the values of the country and I personaly dare someone to impose a rule like this on me. I have earned my right to have a cigarette on my off the clock times from work as well as every other smoker in the US.

Posted by: Garry Location: Divide, CO on Sep 26, 2007 at 10:34 PM
Next, they should ban fat people from eating, gamblers from spending money, and any employee who has received a ticket from driving during work hours.

Posted by: Here Location: Wego on Sep 26, 2007 at 09:01 PM
So are they going to deny me care if I smell like smoke, looks like that!

National News - CBSnews.com
  • Union Pitches In, But Bailout Hopes Dim
    United Auto Workers President Ron Gettelfinger said that the union is willing to change its contract and will delay billions of dollars in payments to a union-run health care trust in an effort to help the struggling Detroit Three automakers.
  • Lil Wayne Leads Grammy Nominations With 8
    Lil Wayne was recognized by the Recording Academy Dec. 3 with eight Grammy nominations including album of the year for "Tha Carter III." Coldplay was close behind with seven nominations.
  • Bush To Ease "Mountaintop Mining" Rule
    Environmentalists launched an online campaign urging Barack Obama to undo a federal rule that clarifies when coal companies can dump mining waste in streams, calling it a long-awaited "parting gift" from the Bush administration.