If casino workers are gonna show support for s smoking ban, then I can't give em support. But when they turn around and start whining about the loss of revenues (and of course loss of customers) once the smoking ban goes into effect, then those casino workers oughta bite the bullet. They asked for a smoking ban, and they got the ban. Now they gotta live with it.
Here's an article in relation to the smoking ban effects NJ casinos are receiving.
And I still think if casinos here in IL get exempted from the state ban, I think ALL hospitality businesses should be exempted in fairness. What makes saving the casino industry more important than saving the businesses among restaurants, bars, clubs, and bowling alleys? They're all equal to me in terms of depending on smokers as business patrons. So if one hospitality business gets exempted, then ALL hospitality businesses should get exempted. Or better yet, revoke the stupid state smoking ban altogether.
But casinos should get NO EXEMPTIONS whatsoever. Not if they actually were in favor of smoking bans. "We need a smoking ban, and we still support it. But how can we prevent our losses without laying off workers?"
If you want my honest opinion, all I can say is good luck Mister Casino Owner, and that's putting it nicely. But if you're suggesting that your business should get exempted despite the fact you and groups of antis pushed for a smoking ban in the first place, then you can kiss my (you know what). I give support to workers/owners who are initially opposed to smoking bans.
Workers/owners who start snitching about the effects of smoking bans ONLY when the ban starts (and you casino morons can see the negative effects for yourselves) can keep on dreaming if you think I'm gonna support the idea of exempting only one group from the ban. One group that actually showed firm support for the ban.