Washington Law Review


Carolyn Cliff


Despite legislative and judicial efforts to control tobacco smoking in public places, smoking in the workplace continues to cause problems. This Comment analyzes two recent decisions that addressed claims for relief by federal government employees who suffer severe reactions to tobacco smoke: Parodi v. Merit Systems Protection Board, and Vickers v. Veterans Administration. The claims were brought under statutory schemes designed to meet the employment needs of the physically or mentally disadvantaged. The relief granted or considered in each decision gave the hypersensitive nonsmoker only a partial victory. In addition, the Vickers and Parodi decisions offer no assistance to nonsmokers who are not hypersensitive but who are concerned enough about the health hazards of involuntary exposure to want smoking prohibited in the workplace. Nonetheless, they offer hope to those most immediately injured by involuntary exposure to tobacco smoke: hypersensitive nonsmokers.

First Page