No luck

Attempts by workers to completely ban indoor smoking at the nine casinos in Atlantic City ultimately proved unsuccessful after a judge said there is nothing blocking employees from going elsewhere to work in smoke-free places.

loophole that allows people to smoke on 25% of gaming floors

Judge Patrick Bartels dismissed the lawsuit on Friday that sought to end the loophole that allows people to smoke on 25% of casino gaming floors, despite all other workplaces in the state having a total ban in place. Workers claimed this created unsafe working conditions for them and led to long-term health issues.

The judge ruled that the risks of second-hand smoke still didn’t “intrude upon a person’s right to pursue safety” as only a small number of industries are exempt from the smoking ban.

Not over yet

Casino Association of New Jersey President Mark Giannantonio welcomed the news while also confirming he wants to come to a solution that can address the concerns of workers and still protect the industry. Casinos claimed that the introduction of a total smoking ban could lead to revenue dropping by millions and result in significant job losses.

plan is to go to the New Jersey Supreme Court to appeal the decision

Thousands of casino workers supported the lawsuit, and one of the lawyers representing them said the plan now is to appeal the decision to the New Jersey Supreme Court. She spoke about the disappointment of workers who are “exposed to toxic second-hand smoke every day” and the decision to endanger their health “in deference to the casino industry.”

A complex issue

Attempts to have lawmakers pass legislation to close the loophole have been largely unsuccessful. The most recent significant effort came to a halt last year when one of the chief proponents of the bill backed down. This led to Casino Employees Against Smoking Effects and Region 9 of the United Auto Workers filing legal action in April.

Not all workers were in favor of closing the loophole. UNITE HERE Local 54, the biggest casino workers union in the state, supported the lawsuit dismissal as it had concerns about the impact on jobs if the ban went into effect.

Governor Phil Murphy was a defendant in the lawsuit, despite committing to signing smoking ban legislation if it landed on his desk after legislative approval.