Bavaria's non-smoker protection law now passed

Scroll up, this has been discussed ad nauseam. My personal theory for the reason behind this is due to the “first mover penalty� … where it doesn’t matter which particular configuration is more profitable, because being different than the norm is less profitable.

In engineering this is often referred to as a local maxima.

So then it will be very interesting to see what happens with your first mover theory.

I reckon not every bar will join this club system, for whatever reason - maybe out of tax reasons or perhaps they aren't in residential areas and can't be arsed changing status.

Let's see who gets more business after 1 Jan...

Yeah, I'm genuinely interested as well... I admit however, I might very well be incorrect with regard things here in Germany. The smoking culture is extremely entrenched here… something I noticed almost instantly. I think in the US the smoking bans went along with a larger societal shift, whereas here the bans are somewhat preceding it.

However, people here seem to tolerate insane laws (see the tax code) without too much complaint… so I really think it is a toss up. In the end though, I think it will be accepted.

I wrote an explanation as to why it would never work without everyone participating in the ban together, but then read what firelane has said and that explains what I wanted to say much more elegantly. Well done.

But there are already non smoking establishments, the market was responding to the demand.

But if there ends up being an exploitable loophole, then people won't be breaking the law and the status quo will probably remain about the same.

That's the problem with rushing through legislation without thinking about it properly. Had they put more thought into it, then a good sustainable, fair law (to everyone) without any loopholes may have resulted. I believe this was in the interests of those for the ban as well as those against.

As is, this is very quickly turning into a complete farce...

I think the smoking ban was the best thing to ever happen to pubs in the uk back in july, i now go out and return not stinking of smoke. The uk was sensible doing it in the middle of summer when it was not a chore for smokers to go sit in the sun.The smokers soon got the hang of it and i have not seen one instance of the rule being broken anywhere. Now winters here i think its so funny seeing people standing out in all weather shivering while having a smoke, while i sit in a nice warm dry pub laughing at them for smoking outside and paying nearly six pounds for the pleasure of a pack of twenty. The pubs are now fragrant smelling places with nice smells of food wafting through the pub. Landlords are now having to modernise toilets so to keep smells out of the drinking and eating areas, where smoke would hide the smell before. The weather in munich is harsher than here in the uk so to all the non smokers in munich look on laugh and enjoying the stupid smokers killing themselves slowly in the cold and not poisoning us with second hand smoke.

Maybe it's just me, but I find the whole talk of how wonderful it will be completely irritating. Not because I'm against this law (which I am and probably irritates me more), but because the law is getting introduced in such a completely incompetent and moronic fashion that I doubt it's going to be anywhere near as wonderful as people think - and I hate seeing stupidity get praised.

Lets look at the results of a survey of pubs sales since the smoking ban in England and Wales done by the FLVA (the licencess group):

http://www.thepublican.com/story.asp?secti...e=58081&c=1

Total sales down 7.3%
Remember this was AFTER the law came in, not "scaremongering" before it.

Surely loads of newbies ruch in to get a skinny organic bruschetta bukkake on gluten free wholemeal bread to go in a smoke free atmosphere though?
Nope, sales of food fell by 0.6%

think you could be getting a wee bit carried away there...

landlords in the pubs around my town have really tried to make the pubs smell nice. they realised old stinking smelling toilets were going to be a problem so time and money has gone on revamping them. its only a couple of glade plugs in here and there and cooking smells but i will gladly take that over the smell of smoke. all this boils down to is the smokers have had there arses kicked and there is nothing that can be done about it. so to all you smokers get yourself some thermals and a good coat and hat and enjoy the winter while you slowly kill yourselves and not innocent bystanders.

From Wiki

Consider the thousands of non smokers who will go out now. Not to mention all the extra money they have to spend on drinks.

The quitting option doesn't seem to be considered here much.

I quit last March after my husband, also a smoker, had a heart attack. I have needed to avoid going out to pubs and clubs since then because of the temptation and the stink factor. After smoking all my life, I will not pay the ridiculous dry cleaning costs here for other people's smoke.

The new smoking drug, Champix, became available here the week I had planned to quit while Himself was in cardiac rehab. No accidents. BTW, it's a miracle drug.

Please excuse if I am repeating someone else. I stopped reading out of boredom around page 5.

The life span of a pub crawler in Ireland is probably on average 40. Of course they must close a few. I made that up.

Happy Holidays,
Frau Fruit

I refer the honourable lady to the above evidence that they DON'T!

The smoking bans have been gladly greeted by pushy middle class twats who neither went to pubs before or after.

Comment from local publican this evening:

"Smoking is BANNED in my pub from 1st January and if anyone contines to smoke down the far end of the pub - how am I possibly supposed to see who it is to tell them to stop?"

Bullshit



I didn't know all laws broke down in bars. That they were a legal land of limbo where all actions are permissible and it remains a physical impossibility to enforce any rules. Do people have gun battles at high noon in pubs? I was unaware how lawless they were.

I would bet money, that if someone brought in their own alcohol to drink, they would very quickly be discovered and thrown out... stop the bitching.

Here is what I found most notable in that article:


Of course the poll wasn't conducted by an independent pollster, either.

MT, do you smoke, and do you consider yourself working class?

No, I don't smoke. I work in pubs and find the smoke sometimes unpleasant and one the one hand am looking forward tot he new law.
But I think they way it is and the way it has been introduced is worong.

Some venues might be able to innovate.
A lot of small inner city pubs in inner Munich that rely on local regular trade cannot.
ie "could not afford to invest" , "do not have the space to develop outdoor areas"

The comment from the publican I heard yesterday was slightly ironic from him.
He's an oldish publican with poor eyesight. Of course he will ban smoking, but if a regular lights up down the end of the bar and he can't see who it is, what IS he to do?

totally agree. it's the small businesses that will suffer and the big ones will be fine.

The smoking bans are part of the whole trend how pubs are changing.

Despite relaxation in the actual legal restrictions on opening hours they whole thing is becoming more regulated.
The direction they are going in is like a Starbucks.
The pub as we know it as a cornerstone of communities is under threat in its very self as part of the atomisation of society.

It's the publican's code language for "I won't enforce such a stupid law"

Not bullshit. From your link:

I find it amusing to see all of the assumptions and predictions and comparisons being made about how Germans will react to a new law as compared to how folks in Ireland and other places may or may not have reacted.

In light of the fact that Germans are usually presented here as another organism altogether, that is. I will go out on a limb say that they probably don't give a rat's ass about how a bunch of Ausländer feel about it one way or the other.

Carry on.

Fruity

Ah yes, we shouldn't discuss it because we're foreigners.

Yes, nice call...I hope you'll take a lead and keep your opinions to yourself.

er why??? this is a forum for expats discussing life in Germany/Munich and comparing it to our 'back home's. nothing unusual I'd say.

Yes, it's just you...


I take it you mean Happy Christmas.


Just like you keep your tiresome opinions to yourself? Once the furore has died down after Jan. 1, your opinions will become irrelevant...

Exactly!

So you think stupidity should be praised...good for you. And thanks for the insight into how your mind works.

Are you being a winner on purpose? No it's not just him.

No it's not comparable. Think about it for a few more seconds

You don't understand publican code language. Think about it. It's not really so hard to decifer.

They're irrelevant anyway apart from the small world of TT. Carry on...

So the actual publicans are irrelevant?

Well there you have it... Those most affected are deemed irrelevant.

They should have been seen as relevant and involved in some kind of consultation process. Unfortunately for the sake of fairness, the lawmakers see things the same way as people like HellesAngel.

Well done for outing yourself as someone who doesn't give a shit about the livelihood of others...irrelevant indeed...

While you have outed yourself continously as somewhat who doesn't give a shit about the health of others.

Sorry, I'm a bit pissed off at the moment. I am trying hard to get my company (a small company) to do something about the fact that they allow smoking in the kitchens in our company (and in the hallways) and I just got a little 'talking to' from my manager about it because he refuses to accept the fact that things are changing and that it has been a law for 4 years that an emloyer has to provide a separate area for smokers if even just one person complains about the smoke. Here we have 25 people on our floor complaining and the management does nothing (it's not the right time to bring it up, it will take too much time for the smokers to go outside, blah, blah, blah, blah). Grrrrrr.

How? People have a choice where they can go in their free time. I've said several times that I would ban smokers from being in the same room as children (who normally don't have a choice), even if that means banning people from smoking in parts of their own homes.

What's happening at your work has very little to do with what we're talking about here. For a start, they are already breaking an existing law, which if followed, would adequately protect you from working in a smoky environment.

You sound like you're about to start crying Hazza, get the tissues ready dear and sit down and let it all out.

It's a big leap from stating that Hazza's opinions are irrelevant, which they are, to stating that the opinions of all publicans are, as a whole, irrelevant and should be ignored when making laws but maybe when you've finished sobbing you'll see things clearer.

Edit: We foreigners often pilliory the Germans for making complicated rules. Why don't you praise them for the simplicity of this one? No ifs, buts, exclusions, exceptions, just NO SMOKING.

Who's cause have I been championing? The publicans and their livelihoods
And you? People who don't like stinky clothes.

Which cause is more relevant?

You still haven't come up with a feasable solution to the noise problem...

Honestly I don't see the noise problem. Going back to the same debate as on page 3 - if the smokers make noise outside then the smokers are at personal fault but not the ban. Perhaps the pub will get a visit from the Bundesnachbarschaftamt and have to do something to keep their customers quiet, but good businesses react to change and adapt. Every industry has cried when laws restricting their ability to [insert bad practice here] were introduced but they're all still here and they've found ways around their old practices. The world goes on and is better for the change.

Edit: And as to publicans and their livelihoods - the good ones will survive. As with any change there will be some who refuse to adapt and some will go under. Better start planning now, eh?

"Smoking May Be Hazardous to Your Bar"...

"When the undercover investigator walked into the Hill Tap Tavern in Elmhurst, Queens, on Monday, he saw a customer smoking at the bar, according to his report. What happened next left the bar owner facing a charge that could put him in prison for up to seven years"...

http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/12/...us-to-your-bar/

Ah, the Google-to-TT machine found a link showing that if you break the law you run the risk of punishment. Hardly man bites dog stuff.

This is why this ‘debate’ long ago became pointless Hazza, because you are only here to bitch and whine. You are completely ignoring the other side, their proposals, and motivation. It is quite obvious that while you probably understand the other side’s motivation runs somewhat deeper than a desire to do laundry less… you ignore that to sound as if you are ‘championing the working man’.

Please. You totally ignored all health and worker safety motivation, because quite frankly those are very good arguments for the ban, and you know it… as seen by your incessant trotting out of a bogus ‘working late kills you’ argument time and time again as your single flimsy life raft to hold onto.

If this is the kind of discourse that led up to this law, I am loosing sympathy for the pub owners. Whereas earlier I might have been convinced the government hacked together a patchwork quilt of regulation (as per bureaucratic norm) now I’m more willing to believe the difficulty is due to overtly stubborn and unhelpful pub owners, complaining like any industry about environmental controls…. Before passed, it will be “the death knell of the industry� because it is “totally incapable of complying� and “it will cost millions�. After of course, everyone is complaint, and business chugs along… this is heard with every single new piece of legislation (especially worker health/pollution ones, which I consider this akin to)


No, you’ve ignored every feasible solution to the noise problem. Just as you blithely dismissed the motivation of the anti-smoking group above, you dismiss all solutions.

In the same breath as..


Class. I'll quickly instruct all my chefs to stop making that port reduction, forget about clarifying the stocks, drop the fish prep for a while, and quickly pop out to get some alphabetti spaghetti and chicken nuggets.

What, like the laughable "move somewhere else if you live near a bar" or the unrealistic "smokers will just have to be quiet outside" or the financially crippling "employ a doorman at €18000 a year".

They aren't feasible solutions and that's all you've come up with

1) You have inflated the cost of a doorman to serve your purposes
2) It is feasible to ban patrons who do not comply with noise rules.
3) Bars already deal with noise somehow

1) I've calculated €50 a night. That's what I used to pay a doorman on the (rare) nights I needed one. Now multiply €50 by 360 days and you get to €18000. Simple maths really...
2) If you do that, then you will lose your best customers. Smokers are easily the better drinkers. Once again - not a feasible solution for anyone intending to stay in business.
3) Yes, by not allowing their patrons to congregate outside the bar.

You try to make it sound like a non-issue. What experience do you draw from to come up with your simplistic - almost childlike solutions? What authority do you have on the workings and issues that come with owning a bar?

Let's wait and see, but smokers quietly enjoying their poison stick outside seems the simplest solution to the problem, and the one that causes the minimum cost and inconvenience to publicans.

This discussion is simply a disagreement betweent the two opinions:
1) Smokers are capable of talking quietly and being considerate of the neighbours when smoking outside a pub.
2) Smokers care only about their addiction and feeding it comes above everything else and should anyone have a problem with this then no blame rests with the smoker.

Despite your complaints I still feel the vast majority of the smoking population belongs in category 1. Perhaps you're a 2? Let's face it, if I'm right and most smokers are in 1 then pubs continue much as before, but smokers suffer the discomfort of having to go outside to smoke, and for one find that quite fair.

Based on an unrealistic assumption. So while your maths is correct everything else is speculation. Honestly, you're making a fuss about what will most likely turn out to be nothing.

My point, expressed in bold. You won't need a doorman 360 nights of the year, just nights when it is crowded and a crowd is likely to form outside the bar. Then this price can be rolled into the price of drinks/food.


Firstly, if they threaten your business, by definition they are not your best customers. Secondly, you are only banning the loud ones. Banning one or two people will cause the rest to remain quiet since they know there is individual punishment going along with non-compliance. Remember… that was your initial complaint anyway… that pubs were punished for the behavior of individuals. I am showing a way to bring individual accountability. It does not necessarily mean you automatically loose every smoker that goes outside, try as you might to portray it that way.

Correct, do not allow smokers to congregate either. There is no divine requirement they smoke directly outside the bar is there?


No, I am proposing solutions. You try to make it sound like an intractable problem…. It is not.

Oy! I resent the implication that I'm not a good drinker!

It's not that smokers have a particular problem with being quiet outside - everybody has a problem being quiet outside when they've had a few drinks. I speak from experience here. You can get away with the odd bit of noise here and there, but if you have to send smokers outside, there will probably be a group of smokers outside the door 80-90% of the time. That's constant and untenable. Even if they speak in a tone they think is quiet, trust me when I say it never is...


What's unrealistic about it? On what nights would you not need a doorman? Even if you think that it might be a quiet night, there are a lot of times you get surprised by larger than expected crowds. There is no day when you could afford not to have someone there. There are generally more people in the pub on weekends, but on weekdays the neighbours are far more sensitive to noise. So you would really need them whenever you're open - 7 nights a week for most.

I'd still like to know what background you have that allows you to counter my points with such unwavering conviction?

What's your particular experience in the bar trade?

As thefirelane pointed out you've assumed every night will be a session night for enough smokers for them to cause a problem with noise outside. That's speculation. Maybe you're right, but my opinion is you're not. I still put it to you that the majority will be able to smoke and talk quietly most of the time and the problem will not be as bad as you think it might be. Let's hope I'm right.

Yeah, that was when there was no smoking ban


So one must become a clairvoyant as to know if a crowd is likely to form and have a bouncer on call everynight just for this possible event?