Dont forget health care costs that most taxpayers will share. even if the smoker has insurance, there is still the time and energy of medical workers.
That’s because I’m an absolute idiot who screws up vB coding. It should be:
http://www.swedish-snus.com
That site says Swedish snus use is at 10%. I’ve seen much higher numbers. Anyhow, it’s certainly not without risks, but it gives me the jolt of nicotine and taste of tobacco without the hacking coughs and awful smell on the clothes. The medical literature seems to indicate that using snus is far healthier than smoking, but I’m going to be a little bit skeptical, since the site I linked to is obviously financially involved promoting the product. However, all my independent research seem to be congruous with the claims of harm-reduction on that site.
I remember hearing on the news a few years back that the Labor Dept. had conducted a survey and found that smokers had not only higher productivity, but produced a higher quality of work as well.
Something about stepping away from your work/desk and taking a 5 minute break every hour to give your mind a break.
Of course, the smoker doesn’t always reap that benefit, and even if they did, it might not be all that great an award compared to dying early from heart disease or lung cancer.
Rumors of that survey have been floating around for years, but I don’t believe any such study has actually been documented. Not beyond the anecdotal “I work better after my smoke break” reports.
This report by the world bank is fairly well referenced, and has some peer-reviewed sources cited. It estimated that in one 1995 study, a smoker cost their employer about $2565 US dollars in lost productivity each year vs. a non-smoking employee.
http://www1.worldbank.org/tobacco/AAG%20SmokeFree%20Workplaces.pdf
I think the benefits would be neutralized by employees working more poorly prior to their smoke breaks, ie distraction - “God, I need a smoke!”