2007 Smoking Policy

If you can't find the smoking areas then ask someone. But that doesn't always work, once I had someone very angry come up to me, asking where she could smoke, because apparently all the employees she asked either didn't know or pointed her in the wrong direction.

I have to step in here, since I saw two things I have a big problem with, one of which was spoken by a CP employee:

One: the bullcrap about how its "not in the job description" is a lazy ass excuse for basically not doing anything. If everyone followed that rhetoric at CP, it would not be remotely close to the park that it is.

Secondly, you chose the job, and you accepted. Anyone whos anyone knows that working at CP means dealing with angry guests on a daily basis, which is no excuse to cop out on enforcing park policy...if you're going to do that, then don't bother checking restraints since the fat person in row 1 is probably going to bitch anyway...

Okay, I'm getting sick of the trashing on employees. I may be taking this a little too personally, but ever since I had to deal with an enthusiass wearing an ACE shirt that thought he knew how to run and maintain the park and personally insulted myself, my TL, the mechanic at the ride at the time (we were down due to weather), and supervision and management, I don't intend to let it go on without calling it out.

You sit there and hear the same crap, deal with the same stuff day after day and tell me you could truly, honestly be enthusiastic about enforcing a policy that, quite frankly, takes second seat to the safety of the guests on my ride. I know for a fact that most everyone here wouldn't be anywhere near enthusiastic after a while, that is just human nature according to all of my experience and research.

Tim, you can spot the smoke easily 1) because you have nothing better to do. You don't have the safety of 24 guests on every single train that passes through that station on your mind while you're in line. 2) You sound like you are hyper-sensitive to smoke, so you would naturally be inclined to pick up on it. I've said it before, and I'll say it again. Until you've been there and done that, don't bash on the job, don't tell us "we accepted the job, expect it," don't act above those that guard your safety for your enjoyment every day until you have walked in their shoes. The safety of the guests on those trains are our #1 priority, plain and simple. Take it or leave it, that's the fact of the matter.

Technically, we're not supposed to take our eyes off of the ride at any point during our shift on the platform, and that includes checking the line for smokers. We do, however make an occasional visual sweep of the line in between trains entering the station. That gives us about 5 seconds to find line jumpers, guests with alcohol in the line, smokers, among other things that are out of place. Then my eyes are back to the guests in the station and the train entering the station.

mk: Please point out to me the person on here that said that it isn't in our job description. I know that I never once said that it wasn't in the job description.

I wasn't referring to you as far as the job description part, but everything else was..

And honestly, I've met and worked with CP employees that have worked double the years you have, and are still enthusiastic every day, and they may be one in a million, but it seems to me you still hold on to the ACE guy incident, and thats your excuse.

On the ride platform, I understand, and I know you can't see the lines clearly, but anywhere else, theres no excuse. Its employees like you who let the line cutters go through, who let the smokers do whatever the hell they want, and don't really give a crap. If you're at that point, quit working at CP and give someone else the job.

For the record, not only myself, but plenty of people on these boards do know what its like, so don't come off like you're the only who knows blah blah blah. Guest safety and service occur at more places than just CP.

Mike - I clearly said in my posts that I don't blame the ride ops (yes, that would be you) for not enforcing the non-smoking policy because you don't have the back up from management. Did you miss that part and just harp on the part where I said it's quite easy to spot smoke because it would be more dramatic?

I know you guys have other things to do besides look for smokers. But, one of your reasons for not doing it was because it was near impossible to spot a smoker in a queue. I was merely pointing out if CP had someone watching the lines for line jumpers, smokers, drinkers, fighters, etc... then it wouldn't be all that hard to spot and enforce. You have people basically trapped in a queue, so it's pretty easy to find offenders to park policies and eject them from the park if necessary. CP just doesn't want to do that. Did I ever say I blamed the ride ops? Nope.

However, no one said working at CP was an easy job. I've had my fair share of jobs including working at Sea World Ohio. During my employment at Disney, I also did "cross-U" which involved working in the parks during peak seasons. It was tough. But, does that mean I bitched about it all the time? Nope. I still enjoyed it, still smiled at the guests and did everything I was supposed to - whether it was easy or not.

Sorry if I seemed a little harsh on you, Tim. I'm just getting tired of enthusiasts telling us how to do our jobs. I honestly didn't meant to come off as harsh in response to you. I misread your post and thought you were talking about the ride ops in particular. That's my honest mistake.

mk522: If you really think you can know about the experience, fine. But I'll tell you this, if you think I'm an employee that doesn't give a crap, that's fine, but maybe you should discuss that with my co-workers. I'm sure they would agree with you. Yeah, I hold on to that ACE example because it represents everything I hate about the enthusiasts community. And quite frankly, you are coming off the same way that ACEr came off. You personally insulting me and my job is where I draw the line between an enthusiast and an enthusiass. I'll stop my public rant right there. If anyone feels the need to insult me, my job, my supervisors, and management, may do so through the private messaging system.

JuggaLotus said:
^ - and to be honest, I can't blame them. They already get bitched at by the fat people who can't ride, the ones who think the wait is too long, and those that think a ride being down is a personal affront to them. So I don't blame the ops for wanting to avoid another confrontation.

Especially considering the way said confrontation would be handled if management had gotten involved. Regardless of if the guest was smoking in line or wasn't some disciplinary action probably would have been brought about on the employee not excluding termination.

You are terrible. How about thinking about others? And I think it is pretty disgusting that you put your kids in that position. "hiding it behind the handle of a stroller." Someone would take your kids away.

The 07 season was horrible for smoking. There were plenty of times throughout the season where I saw CP Police look right at people smoking where they shouldn't be and they did nothing. I think I am going to start a collection of pictures with people smoking where they shouldn't be, with some employee in the background doing nothing about it. Then I will send them to the park and let them know how bad their policy is enforced.

There is a lot of blame on employees, but not all of them are responsible for the lack of enforcement of the policy. Most positions, especially in rides and merchandise, require employees to remain at their "post." They can't just get up (ie: from a ride's entrance, or a cash register) and walk across the midway to stop someone from smoking. It really comes down to CP Police needing to play a more active role in the entire thing.

I've seen many people smokeing on the midway. It upsets me that people would even want to smoke in a place with that many people when they could be doing better things (its just my opionion). But to see that the rules aren't being enforced by the Cp Police is another thing.

I agree with Ryan, most of the people I asked to use the smoking areas did just that. I, as a seasonal employee though, did not get paid enough to get into the negative confrontations with the guests. When they went down that road I just walked away.......that only happened a handful of times though.

On the other issue I also agree that they need to educate the guests better about the new policy. I do remember seeing an awful lot of signs at the front of the park admission gates where they take tickets but I don't know if anyone can see them because they are on the sides of these huge pillars.

I agree with Doug. There were soooo many times where I'd see people walking right pass CP police with lit cigarette in hand without so much as a glance.

From the sounds of the comments here the season and smoking went as I thought it would. As I said in the begining of the season, the only way for the park to make this smoking area thing work is to have so many smoking areas in the park you can't miss them. Don't give the smokers a reason or easy out for not knowing or having to work too hard to find a place. Once the policy is established the park can then start to roll back the locations. Also it would show management which locations would be most used by the public.

Also to weigh in on a few other comments/issues in this thread:

1) have you ever thought that some of the 'enthusiasts' here on the board not only have good points on operating or working in a park; but also may have worked in an amusement park at some time? Also there are many careers where people have to say and do things that they do not want to.

2)second hand smoke is almost always a non-issue in regard to health risks. ESPECIALLY in an open air environment. There certainly isn't a concensious of data out there that supports the claim that SHS is causing disiese. And the best common sense statement I could fine sums it up like this:

"So how dangerous is secondhand smoke? "Experts" proclaim an incredible 63,000 Americans are killed yearly by secondhand smoke. If true, it has taken a toll far larger than AIDS, drunk drivers and Hurricane Katrina combined. In 1984, Dr. Ernst Wynder, president of the American Health Foundation, observed that "if passive inhalation in fact increases our risk of lung cancer, there should have been a steady increase in the incidence of lung cancer among nonsmokers... Yet there has been no significant increase of lung cancer in male or female nonsmokers.""

The point? Get off of the silly guy with his cig down by the stroller handle. His kid isn't in danger of anything but a little ash. Before you start judging someone of their actions perhaps it would be wise to learn a little about the subject.

Perhaps the most annoying thing about all of these liberal talking points (ie shs, global warming, socialized healthcare...) is that the arguements held by the liberal side are proped up by ignorance of those who believe their twisting and slight of hand of the truth.

Lets just get rid of smoking at the park period. If they want to smoke make the only place for it in the parking lot.

I'm sorry. Did you seriously just quote something from 1984? Not only that... you never said WHO said that. What is your source for that?

Here are some of mine:

California Dept. of Public Heath: http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/93147.php

"Evidence suggests that children are especially vulnerable to the health effects caused by secondhand smoke. Exposure to secondhand smoke by children increases the risk of asthma attacks, ear infections, bronchitis and pneumonia. Long-term exposure also has been linked to heart disease and lung cancer in adults. "

PBS and DR. ICHIRO KAWACHI, Harvard School of Public Health: http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/health/may97/smoking_5-20.html

"We followed a group of about 32,000 women over a period of 10 years to see whether passive smoking might increase the risk of heart attack. And basically we found that women who are regularly exposed in either the work or the home are at about double the risk for heart attack compared to those who are not exposed."

The Mayo Clinic: http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/secondhand-smoke/CC00023

"Compelling evidence indicates that secondhand smoke is a health hazard. And it's nearly as bad as smoking itself. Rich in toxic chemicals, secondhand smoke may play a role in causing or contributing to a number of health problems, from cardiovascular disease to cancer."

"Cancer

In 1993, the Environmental Protection Agency placed environmental tobacco smoke in the most dangerous category of cancer-causing agents, and subsequent research has upheld that status.

Secondhand smoke is a known risk factor for lung cancer. Experts believe that secondhand smoke is to blame for roughly 3,000 deaths from lung cancer in adult nonsmokers each year in the United States. Secondhand smoke is also linked to cancer of the nasal sinuses. It's also been linked to cancers of the cervix, breast and bladder, but the evidence hasn't been as compelling as the link to lung cancer.

Heart disease
Secondhand smoke harms the cardiovascular system of nonsmokers in many ways. For one thing, it causes coronary heart disease, such as a heart attack. It also damages blood vessels, interferes with circulation and increases the risk of blood clots. It's estimated that some 35,000 nonsmokers die of smoking-related heart disease in the United States every year.

Lung disease
Chronic lung ailments, such as bronchitis and asthma, have been associated with secondhand smoke. Exposure to secondhand smoke is also associated with chest tightness at night and feelings of breathlessness after physical activity."

Canadian Cancer Society: http://www.cancer.ca/ccs/internet/standard/0,3182,3172_13127__langId-en,00.html

"

No amount of second-hand smoke is safe.

Second-hand smoke causes sore eyes and throat, nasal irritation, headaches, coughing and wheezing, nausea and dizziness. You are also more likely to get colds and the flu. Breathing in second-hand smoke can also trigger asthma attacks and increase your chances of getting bronchitis and pneumonia.

If you have been exposed to second-hand smoke for a long time, you are more likely to develop and die from heart problems, breathing problems and lung cancer."
And I could go on and on: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=second+hand+smoke+danger

If you are a smoker and want to be in denial about killing yourself and your family, that is up to you. But dont try spreading unsourced "facts" from 1984 to everyone else.

The only thing I hate about smoking is the 20 pounds I gained when I quit! Though this is probably still better than inhaling a campfire every day.

Smoking is a invasive habit. The so-called Light cigarettes smell especially bad. Cigarette butts & wrappers are littering. Ashes are nasty. It’s a big contributor to the rising cost of health care.

Just some of what I experienced
-------------------------
- Multiple smokers walking past Police Officers who were standing in preparation for the parade route. The only one who got stopped was a girl who walked directly in front of an officer. They made her put it out. Then let her letter right there on the Midway. I picked it up and put it in a trash can. The officer didn’t care either way.

- A Police Officer saw a man smoking by the CCMR pond. He told a sweep to go tell the man where to smoke.

- A group of three Policemen walked right past a table of three smokers under the Space Spiral.

- Two Officers outside the Red Garter Saloon watched multiple smokers walk by and sit on the benches outside of the designated area without doing anything.

- Smokers at the Chick-fil-A picnic tables every time I’ve easten there.

- Parent’s who do use the smoking areas only to have their kids sitting right there with them breathing it all in.

- A sweep’s trash picker-upper was completely filled with cigarette butts.

Suggestions
-------------------------
- I did get a teen to stop smoking in the TTD line. I calmly stated the facts to him: “There’s no smoking in line. You’ll get kicked out of the line.” The point being I let him know clearly & succinctly what the downside was to smoking without giving him any attitude. From his perspective no one wants to get kicked out of line. So he put it out. He also picked the butt up and threw it in a trash can.

- Email Cedar Point. They need to understand the problems from a visitors and Season Pass holders perspective. It was the first year at an attempt to control the nasty habit. I offered constructive criticism while understanding it from their end. In part I said: I’d like to address the smoking policy communication, non-compliance and enforcement. The smoking policy seems difficult for Cedar Point to enforce on a daily basis. Either a large number of smokers do not see the signs at the entrance on the pillars, do not read the signs, ignore the signs, can’t find the designated smoking areas, ignore the policy, or they see other smokers outside of the designated areas where no one is alerting them not to smoke on the Midways, at tables or benches.

- CP needs signage that everyone can see. Make it visually consistent with signage and the markings on the park map. Maybe they need to have a cheap separate flier in the park map. Since it’s difficult for ride hosts etc to divert their attention from their jobs, and Police Officers don’t want to do it often with so many visitors in one year, I suggested they think about employees who’s sole job it is to walk Midway areas (like the sweeps and Kodak kids do) and tell smokers where they can smoke. Yes staffing that type of job is difficult. But look to the Amercian Cancer Society or health care students etc. People who are motivated and of the right frame of mind. Not to preach to smokers but to be able to address them and be trained to deal with the few confrontations that might occur. It is America’s largest Amusement Park. I can think they can figure it out.

- The policy is a step in the right direction but it's implementation and effectiveness can be improved. It has to be consistently enforced to battle the ignorance and/or the attitude of smokers and make it a pleasant visit for everyone.

There just needs to be a few more smoking areas in my opinion. I don't smoke myself, but going to other amusement parks, more smoking areas, in more visible places get the point across that you can only smoke in designated areas. At an unnamed park in Jackson, NJ, inside the little brochure you get when you enter the parking lot there was an insert explaining the smoking policy and a detailed description of the numerous areas throughout the park. Inside the park, signs reminding guest of the smoking policy seemed to be everywhere, whereas they are virtually non-existent at CP.
Most of the people I encountered last summer on the midway when I asked them to extinguish their cigarette stated they were just unaware of the new policy, and were very pleasant about it. Only two or three people over the entire season gave me attitude about it, out of what has to be a hundred or more even. More signs, a few more smoking areas, and perhaps an insert or something in each park map with the listing of smoking areas might make the public more aware of policy and lead to more confining their smoking to the designated areas.

Selecting a few articles by people or groups claiming health issues with shs isn't a solid arguement.

The Mayo article isn't about a study that shows links between shs and health risks. It's about what they think the "known and suspected" risks are and how to avoid shs. They're making a statemnet and themselves are quoting from another unamed source on material that in their own words are to some degree "suspected". There is no support to the statement quoted on the thread here from the article nor is the story about a study that makes the statement any truer.

Much of what is stated about shs is based on studies made by others, including most estimates. Regardless of the validity of that study, including the Calif link.

On to the Doctor. From Dr. Kawachi's own study

http://circ.ahajournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/circulationaha;95/10/2374

Results as reported by the doctor are that there were 152 incidents of heart disease found in 32,042 women over a 10 year period of exposure to shs. The statistical results were:

1.58 (95% CI, 0.93 to 2.68) among those with occasional exposure
1.91 (95% CI, 1.11 to 3.28) among those with regular exposure

152 incidents out of 32,000 is an occurance of .4%. Doesn't sound like a huge number to me. What was the occurance for women without exposure? .2% On a face validity issue it doesn't sound very convincing to me. Look at the statistical results. While the number fir the exposed is a significant finding, it still is a weak number. 3.00 is the desired low end of the interval to make a rock solid case. Also the findings have intervals that overlap, opening the real possibility that there isn't a difference in the two groups.

Looking at your google search as posted brings up many sites that argue against the point you argue. Ignoring other sources because they do not agree with your point doens't make them less valid. Find the real studies and look at what they find. Many time that I've seen the findings aren't all that overwhelming. Look at the WHO study.

http://www.obscurious.co.uk/componants/smoking1440.pdf

Page 1442 of the article under Childhood Exposure shows this statement, "There was no trend in risk according to number of smokers in the household and there was a decreasing trend according to cumulative exposure,"

Taking the only statistically relavent finding in the WHO study and you find a result that states that children with more exposure to shs show less health issues! So why was this press release released?

http://www.who.int/inf-pr-1998/en/pr98-29.html

They had an agenda but a study that showed no statistical relevence in any of their findings execpt in one area. And that finding goes against their expected result.

Look at the 93 EPA case or any number of other cited claims. In the end there is little overwhelming evidence that I've found. Just some anicdotal evidence that there are bad things in smoke from a cigarette. But just because there are bad things that we take in doesn't mean that the level provided by a cig is enough to cause a health risk. In fact most good numbers I've seen are from studies that have unreasonablly high exposure to find suitable results. Certainly higher exposure rates that one could have even standing behind a smoker during an entire year at the park. It's like telling me that I have to leave Cleveland because there is Mercury in the soil. But the other side of this truth is that there is a natural level of Mercury in all the soil in NE Ohio that is above the EPA levels of safety for residential developments. Does that mean that Cleveland is unsafe?

Just because people say it over and again doesn't make it any more true. There are plenty of good research material on both sides of this issue. You just hear one side. Certainly if you cannot see this truth in that what we are told by the media and government is set to its own agenda, then I'm not the one you need to have this conversation with.