I'm not entering the debate about the dangers of smoking (although my father and uncle died from lung cancer and my mother from COPD), I'm just saying that if a hotel is advertising itself as smoke free, it should be smoke free everywhere.
Yes, and any dangerous behavior should be regulated!
I agree 100% with SSSSS...How can anyone disagree with the Guru of Marriotts?
Dangerous behavior? Regulated? There are so many things in life that are worse.
I am a non-smoker.
To be honest in our 60+ nights of staying at Marriot properties, the last 3 were the only ones with a real issue about smoking, but as I follow the thread of my previous post I am seeing that it is common policy to allow smoking on patios and pool decks. I have included a copy of Marriott's policy below, it doesn't say smoke-free rooms or indoor spaces it says that they are providing a smoke-free environment. You have to go into the fine print to see about the designated spaces and inforcement policies. No where does it say that some hotels will be allowed to keep a smoke-free designation while allowing smoking in all of there outdoor spaces including their BBQ area. I think if they are making a smoke-free promise, they should have the integrity to back it up.
The Marriott Smoke-free Hotel Policy
Marriott is committed to providing its guests and associates with a smoke-free environment, and is proud to boast one of the most comprehensive smoke-free hotel policies in the industry. Since its introduction in 2006, the policy has been implemented in more than 2,300 properties throughout the United States and Canada under the Marriott, JW Marriott, The Ritz-Carlton, Renaissance, Courtyard, Residence Inn, SpringHill Suites, Fairfield Inn, TownePlace Suites and Marriott ExecuStay brands.
The smoke-free hotel policy has received praise from guests, and Marriott remains committed to achieving a smoke-free environment in all of its properties in the U.S. and Canada. The continuing efforts of these properties to comply with the smoke-free policy reinforces Marriott’s commitment to being an environmentally friendly company.
We look forward to welcoming you — so you can experience the clear difference that Marriott offers
Marriott properties may be Smoke-Free inside the hotel but the entrances are a smoke trap. There is another thread about this very issue. For me I am tired of having to walk through a smoke screen everytime I enter or leave the hotel. You can't smoke in the hotel but but can stand at the entrance to the hotel and make us non smokers walk through a wall of smoke. This is not what I call a smoke free policy. Don't get me wrong smokers do have rights as well as non-smokers but my rights are being taken from me everytime I enter the hotel. Please Marriott find a resonable compromise for both sides but stop allowing smoking at the main entrances of the hotels...
I agree..Marriott should not allow smokng at the entrance to hotels!!!
This was my reason for bringing up the issue initially. I'm tired of walking through a wall of smoke at the entrance of the hotel.
They still don't seem to have done much about it.
They are not listening and this "Marriott Insiders" facility would be a lot more useful if we didn't get stonewalled on pretty much every valid point we bring up.
Apparently that small percentage of people who smoke must be Marriott's most important customers still, they get the patios, the barbecue areas, pool areas, doorways, etc...
I don't smoke and I really think that non-smokers go over the edge. There is nothing wrong with having an area designated as smoking at a Marriott. Almost all their areas are smoke free and to worry about such a thing to me means you need to get a life. This is still America and if people wish to smoke they should be permitted to do so. If hey want to drink giant sized sodas and giant fries leave them alone. The biggest killer in this country is alcohol and no one is running around banning that for sure! It causes more harm than good.
As far as staying at a hotel that permits dogs and other pets I suggest if this bothers you stay at a hotel that does not permit them. That is why we have apples and oranges. I always board my pets but if someone wants to take their pets with them I thank the hotels that allow them to stay. Pets are a very, very important part of a family.
As far as there being a ton of smoke at the entrance of a hotel I have never run into this.
Non smokers are just plain annoying and do not respect the right of those who chose to smoke. I am a non-smoker and I just avoid it.
Don't like what is on a channel change it. That is my motto.
And you have convinced me that you are really a smoker. Non-smoker are not going on the edge why should those who do not smoke have to live with the choice, that involves noxious fumes, that another has made? Marriott properties need to stick to their smoking policy. A smoker's habit intrusive.
Kind of funny story related to this. I have three Japanese business visitors visiting our plant. We use a Courtyard that is 1) really convenient - about 1/2 mile 2) really nice - fully renovated 3) have good corp rate. I booked their rooms then they replied they wanted "smoking rooms." I replied that the hotel is non-smoking. They then asked me to find them another hotel that is convenient, nice and allows smoning. My response - this is California. There is no such thing. They agreed to stay at the Courtyard. Well I have to compliment them. They never even asked to smoke in my car, but every day when I picked them up at the hotel they were standing out frong (away from the front door) smoking - along with a few other guests. There was an astray, so I believe the area was for smoking. Folks - some people smoke and, in my opinion, if they follow the rules and are polite about smoking we should allow them their vice. Just my humble opinion!
Agreed, if they follow the rules and are polite I can chose to walk around the smoking areas to avoid it however; when I can't and have to walk through it at a door then it's time to designate "smoking area" that is away from the entrances and enforce the policy.
I agree with you. I have to go past smokers for less than a minute. They have rights too. I think there are too many other things to worry about. How about those obnoxious drinkers!
lakersfan I also agree with you.
My favorite saying is he who lives in glass house should not be casting stones.
How about all those annoying people on the airlines that bring tons of baggage on the plane as carry on. No one enforces that one. That annoys me. The rules are in place and no one enforces them. I have NEVER seen an airline enforce the carry on size rule.
Of course smokers have rights and drinkers can be obnoxious, but when one makes the decision to drink we have laws and policing in place as a deterrent, and if necessary a punishment, for those whose drinking rises to the level of endangering others.
I can remove myself from the presence of, or ignore, a drinker who is drinking in pubic, or in the privacy of their hotel room; but I cannot escape the the noxious smell and the effects on my asthma and allergies if and when I am forced to pass through as I attempt to enter a building or find myself sleeping in a hotel room where someone has decided that his/her rights to suck on a cigarette is greater than the rights of others' to breathe "fresh" air and not have their clothing and hair reeking of all those chemicals(drugs) designed to hook one into a habit the will surely kill them and for sure cause them, at some point, to live a life harmed by the for sure dangerous effects of smoking.
In many California cities the law not only says you can't smoke in some buildings, but you can't smoke within 30 feet (or 50, I forget) of a door way or window or ventiliation opening. In some cities the law says you have to be 100 feet away from any part of the building. In an office where I used to work, smokers had to walk out to the parking lot to get far enough away from the building.
Here's my view: People have a right to smoke. It's their body. They can kill themselves if they want to. *BUT* no one has the right to force anyone else to smoke against their will. Any time. Any where. Any amount. So you want to smoke, then smoke. But it is your obligation to make sure that you do it in such a way as not to allow your smoke to intrude on anyone else.
If smokers would simply make sure that their smoke doesn't get to someone else, none of the anti-smoking laws would ever have been created. The only law we would have needed was the Law of Common Courtesy.
California is an over regulated state like no other state. Thank heaven we are not all at that point yet with all the laws and regulations. I prefer my freedom. No more from me on the subject. Alcohol kills more than smoking ever will but nothing is done about that one.
Thanks for the share everyone.
No problem with the smokers that follow the rules, many thanks to them.
I don't smoke. I occasionally drink (as in not much at all) but certainly I am very careful to be respectful and follow the rules/laws/etc.
Retrieving data ...