All WDW Resort Hotels non-smoking effective June 1st!

[travelskip]

Confirmed on the Cast Member Intranet:

New Smoke-Free Policy

All Walt Disney World® Resorts, including Disney Vacation Club Resorts, will become smoke-free on June 1, 2007. During the past five years Guest demand for smoking rooms has been declining steadily. Currently, less than 3.5 percent of Walt Disney World's 24,000 resort rooms are smoking optional.

The new policy applies to all guest rooms, patios, and balconies, and designates outdoor smoking areas at all resorts affected by the change. Smoking is currently prohibited in all lobbies, restaurants, and convention spaces. This policy will allow us to better accommodate the large numbers of Guests and Members who request non-smoking accommodations and complements our efforts to provide our Guests with the healthy living options they are requesting.

 

[The Mom]

This is your second warning! Stop with the personal attacks. It might also help to turn this back into a discussion if people on BOTH sides of the issue would stop with the all the exaggerations, dramatics, and hyperbole.

 

[STITCHRULES]

I have to say I am dissapointed. This new policy will certainly curtail our frequent visits - in fact my hubby says our upcoming trip on the 25th will be our last . We own DVC and have always enjoyed staying on Disney property. We are very courteous of non-smokers and only smoke outside on the patio/balcony and if we were ever told that it was bothering someone next door, etc would cease until a time when it would not affect anyone. However, that being said- spending $13k for something I am now not going to be able to use or at least not be able to enjoy is ridiculous. I think Disney should set aside a floor or building to accomodate those of us that do smoke. Florida has an "Indoor Clean Air Act" so while you cannot smoke in restaurants etc, you can step outside to do so. The only way we will be able to continue to use our DVC now is if we pay the fine in advance- which while not a problem is a bit stupid as all rooms will become smoking rooms. It may just be easier to sell the thing and buy somewhere else. I have contacted MS about this and they are escalating my complaint to a manager. I know at Marriott properties while you cannot smoke indoors (Fla. Indoor CLean Air Act) you can still smoke on balconies etc- as this is outdoors. Ugh! I am the biggest Disney fan ever, but will not be forced to vacation without my hubby!

 

[slappy magoo]

We are very courteous of non-smokers and only smoke outside on the patio/balcony and if we were ever told that it was bothering someone next door, etc would cease until a time when it would not affect anyone.

To a degree, I feel sorry for you, but it goes back to one of my original posts on this subject-the problem isn't with considerate smokers who'd go out of their way to not bother non-smokers, but with the inconsiderate non-smokers who would smoke in a non-smoking room if no smoking room were available, or bother people by smoking on the balcony, letting the stench waft up and over into adjoining rooms. I know some people say "Oh, come on, the smell isn't that bad," but it is. Every day after work, I walk a mile from my building to Penn Station to take a train home, and since NYC restaurants have a no-smoking policy, I walk past plenty of bars & restaurants where people smoke. There was a brief time when my wife was worried I was either smoking or seeing someone who smoked, because she could smell it on my beard when I got home. If I could walk past people smoking and have the smell be so strong that it gets on me, it's going to seep through a window and get in other rooms if someone smokes on a balcony. There have been other threads about people in a building where someone tried to smoke in the bathroom in an adjoining room and the smell went through the ventilation system and stunk up their room as well.

Between smoking rooms not being requested as much, and the smokers who light up with no consideration of others, this policy makes the most sense, from a business standpoint, for WDW. They may lose you, true, but they may gain back the trust of other people who stopped staying onsite because they got stuck in smoking rooms in the past. It may also, by implication, show children that it can be a tremendouns pain in the butt to smoke sometimes and discourage them from starting (pip dream, more likely, but possible).

And a final note to all the smokers on the board...for all we know, smoking areas in the resorts might not be some gulag scenario. They might have plenty of options, they might be in scenic areas, it might not seem so prohibitive as you think it will. WDW for the most part, has a history of trying to accomodate guests needs AND wants, and you might learn that you're not as restricted as you think you will be. Of course, if your only satisfactory answer is that you want to smoke in your room, you're SOL. But as a DVC member, I know my wife & I would be upset to get a room where people smoked and ask to change. And there are a lot of people who feel that way now, enough so that it's cost-prohibitive for WDW to get the smoke out of the room. THe only cost-effective room is to get rid of the smokers. Sorry, but on the other hand, the first half of my life was spent having to endure smoke if I wanted to go outside to do pretty mcuh anything. Smokers in theme parks, smokers in restaurants, smokers in clubs when I got older, hell, smokers at my Little League games. But it was just something you had to endure to be a part of society. It doesn't bother me all that much to have the shoe on the other foot, and see smokers forced to adapt instead of non-smokers.

 

[Senderella]

That wouldn't be a double chin under that beard would it?
If the answer is yes are you admitting to being a smoker and fat and lazy?

Hey now.. kindly leave Dime out of this. He was beyond fat and lazy when he was alive. I'd like to see a marathon runner have the energy he did on stage every night.

 

[AkiraRaptor]

I was a smoker too in the past. Quit over 2 1/2 years ago. Found out afterwards smoking had effected my health and now I have to live with the medical issues because of it for the rest of my life.

But this is not to say I don't feel for the courtious smokers. I was one as well and would only ever smoke where Disney said you could.

But, in reading the statements from Disney it's pretty clear this has nothing to do with smokers/non-smokers and there beliefs and precieved rights. This is about money. They want to sell more rooms, and having smoking rooms sit empty at the busy times of the year is not what a good buisness does.

Someone else said that the industry (hotel) as a whole is doing this, so why is this such a big surprise to everyone. Other countries, and states across the world have been banning smoking for years now.

This is just the way it is. If you don't like it, tell them with your voice and your pocket book.

 

[Pumbas Nakasak]

These scent free enviroments, I take it theyd include SSE Soarin JIYI .06, etc etc. Careful what you wish for.

As for porkers, ive had weight issues most of my life, its simple I eat too much and thanks to long work hours, dont exercise the way I should, however i bet I eat less and choose healthier options than most on here, but Ive had size issues since I was plugged full of steroids as a kid, part of a drug trial. But dont let that stop you thinking Im lazy or a buffet trawler.

Im comfortable with who I am, after all things could be worse, I could be a non Scot for 1.

 

[Chape19714]

From a simple business perspective...this is very good.

As for the smoking issue, it should still be allowed, but in desiginated areas, like in the parks.

 

[geoffm24]

I find it really funny that this argument is so heated in the year 2007. Looks like in Canada we are miles ahead of you in the US when it comes to smoking laws. You would be hard bent to find a public place in this country where it was legal to smoke.



It's only a matter of time before most public places become scent free. The majority of hospitals, churches and universities have scent free policies around here. That being said, it's a lot more difficult to regulate AND scents don't kill nearly as many people as cigarettes do.



Unless of course you believe in science.



I has little to do with kids seeing the cigarettes in my opinion. I see nothing wrong with kids being in the presence of alcohol, for instance. It's about the fact that cigarette smoke kills both those smoking and those not smoking. I fail to understand how that even compares to alcohol.



Ok. So he's not fat and lazy....just completely rude and insensitive. Got it!



I don't know if you've ever tried to transport a ECV across the ocean or the continent but I wouldn't think it would be as easy as you think.

I'm not some drug addicted junkie, as smokers are often portrayed.

Actually.....if you are addicted to cigarettes, you are a drug addicted junkie. I'm not saying that I can't sympathize with people who have addictions of all sorts but I wouldn't tolerate watching someone shoot heroin in my presnence and that can't even kill me like someonse smoking cigarettes in my presence can. So I'm more concerned about smokers than I am about other junkies./quote]



The above quote refers to wheelchair and ECV users: It's not that these people can't walk at all - they just can't handle a day of walking in the parks. So they probably got there the same way you or I did.



I have gone back through this thread reading every single post and I don't see where anyone equated smokers with "white trash, unsophisticated imbeciles."



In the designated smoking area, clearly. That's probably why they call it a "designated smoking area".



First, I think we've already established that smokers have no specific rights other than the general human rights and freedoms and Constitutional rights that we all share.

Second, handguns and bullets are perfectly legal to purchase too. Does that mean that you should be able to shoot them on Disney property too?



I agree with you. But what rights are being violated through smoking bans?



The fact of the matter is, we shouldn't have to do something about it. The onus isn't on us. We are walking around minding our own business. The onus is on the smokers and Disney.



Again, America is very much behind the times on this one. Peanut bans have been happening in public schools in this country for quite a few years now. Also, many food manufactures have been putting out peanut-free versions of their products and restaurants are beginning to notify customers when peanuts are on the premises. As a person allergic to peanuts, you should really notify Disney of this every time you make a dining reservation.

There was an interesting piece on 20/20 2-3 weeks ago. Basically, "those who believe in science" have shown there is 0 chance of having any negative effects from second hand smoke you might catch in passing. The chlorine in the pool and the cleaning chemicals are much more dangerous but that isn't a fun non PC thing to attack.

Also, obesity in America now kills just as many people as smoking and within 10 years will kill far more. If health was REALLY what WDW was after they would go after the food.

It seems that most Americans have put down their cigarettes and picked up a donut instead.

I can't wait to see the threads when your meal plan is tied to your room key and your BMI. No sweets and fried foods for those who are overweight.

 

[WaltzingMatilda]

Nevermind...

 

[JikoMarie]

Also, obesity in America now kills just as many people as smoking and within 10 years will kill far more. If health was REALLY what WDW was after they would go after the food.

It seems that most Americans have put down their cigarettes and picked up a donut instead.

I can't wait to see the threads when your meal plan is tied to your room key and your BMI. No sweets and fried foods for those who are overweight.

I guess we have to agree to disagree. I believe that there is an element of choice involved in both obesity and smoking. However, I do not believe that obesity can harm the health of others besides the individual who is obese.

Are you honestly making the argument that second-hand smoke is not harmful?

 

[MickeyJman06]

woo-hoo!
:sohappy: :sohappy: :sohappy:

 

[Belle1984]

Well I am happy to say that this is my first post on this site! I am very excited to have joined. I am also so happy that Disney hotels have become smoke-free. This is great news to asthmatics ears such as myself! :sohappy:

 

[slappy magoo]

Well I am happy to say that this is my first post on this site! I am very excited to have joined. I am also so happy that Disney hotels have become smoke-free. This is great news to asthmatics ears such as myself! :sohappy:

wow...your EARS have asthma? That wheezing must be deafening! :lol: Welcome to the boards.

 

[Belle1984]

wow...your EARS have asthma? That wheezing must be deafening! :lol: Welcome to the boards.

Haha. I just realized I said that after I already posted it. Silly me!! :ROFLOL:

 

[Scooter]

I guess we have to agree to disagree. I believe that there is an element of choice involved in both obesity and smoking. However, I do not believe that obesity can harm the health of others besides the individual who is obese.

Are you honestly making the argument that second-hand smoke is not harmful?

Not defending Smoking...but apparently second hand smoke is harmful to SOME but not to others. Persons with breathing difficulties and disorders can certainly be affected by second hand smoke.

I grew up in a household where one parent smoked 3 packs of non filtered cigarettes a day and the other smoked 4 packs of non filtered cigarettes a day. I have 2 sisters and 2 brothers. All of us lived in the same house until we each turned 18. My parents smoked all winter with the windows closed and we rode in the family station wagon with the windows rolled up while both parents chain smoked on our 500 mile plus family vacations.

To this day, NONE of my siblings, nor I, have EVER experianced any signs of any smoking related illnesses and we are all over 50 years of age.

While I do agree that second hand smoke can be bad for some, it is my opinion, that the effects of outdoor second hand smoke is minimal if at all. In other words, I believe that the reports of second hand smoke damage is greatly exaggerated in order to get people to quit smoking.

 

[Eyorefan]

Not defending Smoking...but apparently second hand smoke is harmful to SOME but not to others. Persons with breathing difficulties and disorders can certainly be affected by second hand smoke.

As a person with one lung I can't stand next to a person who is smoking and breath very well. That's why I chose not to stand next to people who are smoking. I don't go into bars filled with smoke and I don't hang out in the smoking area of restaurants.

I believe we all have freedom of choice and should exercise that freedom as much as possible. If you want to smoke, it's perfectly legal and you have that right, just as I have the right not to stand next you, and Disney has the right to tell you not to do it in their hotels.

 

[JikoMarie]

While I do agree that second hand smoke can be bad for some, it is my opinion, that the effects of outdoor second hand smoke is minimal if at all. In other words, I believe that the reports of second hand smoke damage is greatly exaggerated in order to get people to quit smoking.

This is your opinion. You can't tell me that smoking outdoors does not affect me when I know that it does. I'm not making it up.

Anyway, we aren't just talking about outdoors. This policy is about indoor smoking too.

 

[JDM]

Hallelujah!! we can all breathe easier!
EXCELLENT decision.

If Smokers (the definite minority) don't like it, don't go to Disney.

Smoking is not a right and Disney is private property.

Enough said.

 

[flynnibus]

Not defending Smoking...but apparently second hand smoke is harmful to SOME but not to others.

[...]

To this day, NONE of my siblings, nor I, have EVER experianced any signs of any smoking related illnesses and we are all over 50 years of age.

Well not everyone who smokes gets cancer...and not everyone who drinks excessivly gets liver disease either enough to raise a problem.

If cancer were as simple as 'smoke 10 cigs = cancer' we'd be in a whole different medical world.

I believe that the reports of second hand smoke damage is greatly exaggerated in order to get people to quit smoking.

I look at it this way.. go back and look at the materials in your parent's house and cars after smoking that much.. the coating everything has on it.. the stains.. That's inside you as well. Now will it cause a medical problem for you.. depends.. but it's certainly in there and not the same as if you were not around all that smoke.