Should Vegas still be smoking?
When I moved here I considered smoking in casinos anachronistic and have advanced to viewing it as a necessary evil. I remember an interview with the late Joe Strummer (of Clash fame) who told me that allowing smoking inside casinos was his favorite part of Las Vegas.
Viewing smokers in a casino now reads to me as a visible sign that the rules that apply elsewhere do not apply in Las Vegas. Of course, for casinos there are practical reasons beyond the symbolic, like all of the people you can see at any resort who enjoy spending their days smoking and playing slots, a match of bad habits that seems as common and beloved as peanut butter and jelly here.
The resort companies are not oblivious to how nonsmokers and former smokers feel about the odor of cigarettes. Even an older resort like the downtown El Cortez pumps scent into the air to combat the smell. There are plenty of resorts like the Riviera where the smell of cigarettes feels like part of the decor. Meanwhile the newer resorts have gone at the problem with incredibly sophisticated filtration systems to prevent you from experiencing the smell of the cigarettes people are free to smoke. This is certainly true of Wynn, where in all of my visits I recall the odor of a cigar only once, never a cigarette. But I don't work at Wynn like dealer Kanie Kastroll does. Kastroll is suing Wynn saying that the casino is an unsafe workplace because of the dangers posed by second-hand smoke. This is the second recent lawsuit to make such a claim against a Strip resort. Caesars Palace is also being sued by a former employee.
I do not have an opinion here. I don't mean that as a cop-out. I simply do not know nearly enough about the science and health risks of second-hand smoke. I am a nonsmoker. Yet there is a part of me that feels Las Vegas would lose yet one more bit of our unique formula of freedoms and permissiveness that allows people to do things profoundly unhealthy for them during their Vegas vacation. I have always--without evidence, I admit--- thought that many of the smokers I see in resorts are really Vegas smokers, who don't actually have a cigarette habit back home but indulge themselves in all ways while visiting Sin City.
I guess, I really wish Joe Strummer, the bitter denouncer of proletarian exploitation and a chain smoker, were still alive to get his opinion on the topic.
Photo: Sarah Gerke
I am sure that eventually, smoking will be banned even in Las Vegas casinos. But it is interesting that this attorney is seeking class-acton status for other Wynn dealers yet says he is not trying to ban smoking but just control it like the Bellagio does.
I don't know how these lawsuits will go. Suing the casinos on their home turf in Nevada has never gone well for plantiffs. And secondhand smoke has been a known carcinogen since the mid-1980s. New studies only confirm that it is bad. These type of lawsuits are not as automatically successful as some people think.
The casinos have won other simular lawsuits in the past. They won't ban smoking unless they believe it is economically advantageous to do so. And I don't think that will happen anytime soon.
Posted by: Mike | October 22, 2009 at 10:36 AM
I was really looking forward to moving here because I would then be able to smoke in a restaurant one again. The greeting of "Smoking or NonSmoking," was just music to my ears.
I moved here and immediately a vote happened that banned it where food is being served. I'm still a little ticked off about that because I did not yet have official residency so I couldn't even vote on it.
The legalization of smoking pot in casinos might give a bit of an upturn in our visitor numbers, though, don't ya think? It would also get those rabid nonsmokers off my back....
Pam
Posted by: Pam Love | October 22, 2009 at 12:02 PM
I am a former smoker, having quit in 1978. However, I have on many occasions found myself buying a pack when I go to Vegas and then throwing away any that are left when I packed to leave. I have no problem not smoking when I go back home and I don't believe that my 2-3 times per year lapse will have any appreciable impact upon my health.
However, my friend who lives in Vegas, a sports writer for the Sun, hates cigarette smoke and would love to see smoking banned in ALL the casinos. I have to admit that if I lived and worked in Vegas I might feel the same. But I don't think I'd go as far as filing a lawsuit.
Posted by: John | October 22, 2009 at 12:45 PM
Shouldn't there be a modicum of intelligence or insight in articles posted on the Times' website?
An article by someone who admits --at least twice--that he knows nothing about what he's talking about?
Geez, if it was satirical or funny in some way, ok; but as it is, this item is just pitiful.
Posted by: Gene | October 22, 2009 at 02:11 PM
If it made economic sense for the casino’s to ban smoking then, we would all have been out on our "butt’s" a long time a go. Some of the casino’s as you say have brought in air filtration systems and others have some smoke free areas or corridors, I believe that the Aria, when it opens, is implementing technology on their tables where there is a wall of air that will blow in front of the dealers to hopefully keep the smoke away.
The biggest problem I see is that if you ban smoking in a casino, then you no longer have a captive audience, hordes of smokers will head for the doors to light up and some may choose to move on and not come back to the tables or slots; that image I imagine keeps casino executives up at night
I smoke and try to be courteous and step away from the table when I need a smoke and by and large I see most smokers as being the same way, however for most non smokers, what registers with them is the jerk that lights up anyway and has no concern what so ever for anyone but themselves.
Posted by: JIm W | October 22, 2009 at 03:48 PM
The justification I've always heard as to why smoking is still allowed in casinos is because they do not want to turn away any gamblers who smoke. I've wondered for a long time now what would happen if one major casino would actually go entirely non-smoking. Would they lose any business? Certainly they would, but I think they'd attract an even greater number of customers who would love to gamble in a completely smoke-free environment. I know I'd certainly book my next stay at a smoke-free casino.
Posted by: elf | October 22, 2009 at 05:37 PM
If they do this then the "Sin City" mystique will have just a little more of itself.
If people are gorging themselves freely with with the high sodium, high fat, high sugar, cholesterol laden, rich foods from the buffets, then smoking shouldn't be touched.
Posted by: Ern1911 | October 22, 2009 at 06:41 PM
As far as the health of casino employees is concerned...ever heard the phrase "occupational hazard?" Casino employees knew they would be exposed to secondhand smoke when they took their jobs. They knew of the risk, and accepted it. To put things in perspective, I've been an auto mechanic for 16 years. Every day on the job, there are 1001 ways for me to get sliced open, burned, blinded, dismembered, poisoned, paralyzed, or even killed. I am aware of the dangers, and choose to accept them. I'm responsible for my decision, and casino employees are responsible for theirs.
On the subject of completely smoke free casinos, Bill's Casino/Resort at Stateline, in Lake Tahoe, voluntarily went smoke-free after Nevada's ban was passed in 2006. The resort has done okay since then, but it has definitely not raked in swarms of secondhand smoke-hating patrons. Its neighbors, which still allow smoking, continue to have plenty of business. Bill's is owned by Harrah's, and it's believed that the company wanted to see how well a smoke free casino would do. It's been three years now, and Harrah's other properties continue to allow smoking.
I've been a Reno resident for six years now, and I'm a non-smoker, but I will be voting NO if a casino smoking ban is ever put to popular vote. The 2006 ban, which exempted casinos, passed by a measly 4% margin (54%-46% in favor) which shocked the anti-smoking groups. It means many non-smokers voted against it.
Posted by: Larry | October 22, 2009 at 10:50 PM
Strummer was disgusted by the anti-smoking brigade and suggested bars, restaurants or even entire neighbourhoods were set up for smokers exclusively.
I think he was right and I know I'd go to a bar Joe was in any day of the week.
Tim
Posted by: TheClashBlog | October 22, 2009 at 11:47 PM
Yes, I believe in Las Vegas you should be able to smoke. The boats in Illinois hurt really bad when they ended the smoking on their casino boats. If you can't smoke, drink and play the machines, people are going to stay home and Vegas cannot afford that to happen. Since Illinois went non-smoking 3 years ago, I have not been on an Illinois gambling boat nor my smoking friends. I personally know a bar owner in Illinois that was forced to go non-smoking and after 30 years in business, is closing his doors.
Posted by: Nancy Sanders | October 23, 2009 at 06:23 AM
An alternative to smoking bans
There has never been a single study showing that exposure to the low levels
of smoke found in bars and restaurants with decent modern ventilation and
filtration systems kills or harms anyone.
As to the annoyance of smoking, a compromise between smokers and non-smokers
can be reached, through setting a quality standard and the use of modern
ventilation technology.
Air ventilation can easily create a comfortable environment that removes not
just passive smoke, but also and especially the potentially serious
contaminants that are independent from smoking.
Posted by: Thomas Laprade | October 23, 2009 at 12:02 PM
To Elf, there was a casino on the Strip a few years ago called the Silver City that went non-smoking. It's currently a shopping center. I'm not sure if the smoking policy was directly the cause of its demise but they were the first (and so far last) non-smoking casino in Vegas.
When I moved here I considered being a dealer but I can't stand smoke and it's an occupational hazard that goes along with it. I also rarely play table games for the same reason.
The reason they don't ban smokers is that it's a proven fact that smokers tend to be bigger risk takers that most likely would participate in other risky activity such as... you guessed it, gambling! Plus all the going outside to catch a puff would distract from the gambling action too much.
What's the solution? Tough to say. All I know is that smoking won't be banned anytime soon.
Posted by: Mike | October 23, 2009 at 12:34 PM
Hi
I believe that in casinos that there should be a separate area for smoking as last time we were there the smoke was so appalling and the ceilings so low that the ventilation system didnt work so you just cant enjoy the game which is a shame. I'm not saying stop smoking altogher in Vegas just have a separate gaming area......
Posted by: Vegastoday | October 24, 2009 at 09:16 AM
It's a real shame that in 2009 you still have a hard time gambling in Vegas without inhaling lots of secondhand smoke. Surely they could at least wall off certain areas and install separate ventilation systems. Everywhere else caters to the vast majority of the population who are the non-smokers. In Vegas you have to endure breathing emough smoke that you may as well be smoking yourself. That's so backwards it's incredible. I hope that there are some major changes made very soon. And I certainly have a lot of sympathy for the non-smoking dealers.
Posted by: Pete | October 24, 2009 at 10:01 AM
I only go to Vegas for a 2-night stay once per year. I would go 4 times per year if there was no smoking in casinos. It is an unhealthy environment.
Posted by: Ken | October 27, 2009 at 04:36 PM