Au contraire alwaysthere,
There are several passionate 800lb gorilla-busting smoke-free champions throughout Marriott. From GMs to Housekeeping, Loss Prevention, Concierge and more. Boot camp started in North America; now, smoke-free zones are emerging globally*. Feel free to share with us the Marriott** hotels and resorts that you think do a GREAT job delivering a 100% smoke-free stay***. A few of them are already covered, see earlier posts:
Smoke-free Marriott brands:
I agree with you. Legislation varies. Some municipal and state statutes prescribe setbacks and/or distances where a cigarette urn/receptacle may be placed. I have written repeatedly to Customer.Care@Marriott.com to point out conditions that you describe. Happily, hotel management more often than not welcomes feedback that will have a positive impact on their guests.
I'm not sure the 'breathe' campaign was effective. Last summer, we visited 3 Wyndham timeshare properties. The Wyndham Bay Voyage Inn located in Jamestown, Rhode Island was smoke-free and very pleasant. But, Wyndham Inn on the Harbor and the Wyndham, Long Wharf both on Thames Street in downtown Newport, Rhode Island had the 'choke & stink' campaign going.
It is not possible for hotels to maintain a zero smoking policy, especially when people use their balconies, or the entrances as smoking refuges. As a test of this ask (discretely) of anyone in Management how many people have been charged the smoking penalty fee--in my experience the number is normally low to zero and the no smoking program has been in place for over a year now.
Free will being what it is, combined with addiction, the smokers will continue to puff in the vicinity of, or in Marriott and other hotel rooms. My Wyndham Tampa experience was pleasant by the way but odd (that's another tale)
Americans for Non Smokers Rights published quotes from over two dozen executives in the hospitality industry including well-known brands to regional chains: Hotel Owners, Managers, and Employees Quotes in Support of Smokefree Policies. Wyndham is not there, but I do not need an article to confirm my experience!
Although smoking is banned by the FAA for over a decade, this past January a smoker on a Delta flight took a cigarette break in a lavatory causing a mid-air brawl. The plane had to be rerouted from it's course in order to eject the smoker who attacked other passengers and a flight attendant!
Marriott's $250 Recovery Fee conveys corporate's intention to ensure the comfort, well-being and safety of it's hotel guests and most importantly insurance that they maintain their license to operate in states with smoke-free legislation.
While the rule may be simple, enforcement is not. We've spent alot of $$ in Newport, Rhode Island compelling us to search for a timeshare in a market where RCI/Wyndham has the lion share. Recently, we visited a 2 BR 2 bath unit with a spiral staircase up to a bedroom loft. We were astonished to find the staff using the balcony for a cigarette break. Even though the sliding door was closed, the stench was a turnoff. The tour ended and the agent not only lost a sale but total credibility.
Thank you, Marriott for not only stepping up to take the lead on a smoke-free policy; but following-through to ensure that the policy is enforced.
I wrote in my blog about the The trendy Renaissance Vegas hotel that is one of the few smoke free Las Vegas hotels.
Marriott is smart to have smoke free hotels to prevent law suits later on 3rd hand smoke because it has been proved that there was cancer causing toxins in a child’s urine after they entered into a smoke filled room even though the smoker had vacated the roomNow that research says that 3rd hand smoke, in rooms and rental cars, causes cancer, I like to stay in a smoke free hotel, but they too don’t have good rates available.
Fascinating. Thank you elitepro for highlighting the research into the risks posed by third-hand smoke - carcinogenic substances and toxins left behind in the tiny particles from tobacco smoke. The crusade for a smoke-free environment indoors and outdoors is far from over, there is a need for education on third-hand smoke throughout the lodging industry. The research underscores the importance of Marriott's ongoing lead in implementing and enforcing a smoke-free policy.
British Columbia has the right idea. Buildings are smoke free and there is fine for smoking within a large distance of any smoke free entrance! Kind of three point arc, but larger. We need that here and have to enforce the no-smoking on balconies and at the pool rule.
I also think the "fine" (through rarely enforced in my unscientific polling) of $250 is too low considering the stench that ionization makes as associates attempt to clean up a room that a smoker had defiled.
California has been smoke free since the 1980s, leading most of the other states in bannign smoking indoors. What we need and do not have is more smoke free building entrances, such as those in Canada, toi ensure that folks entering a building are not bombarded by huddled smokers getting their fix at entrances to hotels.
TCJ: did the sign actullay keep the smokers away or were there scofflaws at the pool?
"What we need and do not have is more smoke free building entrances, such as those in Canada"
Smoke free statutes vary by state and municipality. Massachusetts, for example, permits designated smoking zones, but prescribes a required distance from a building entrance. The impact of the Massachusetts statute is evident at most Marriott properties I have stayed at. The poorest implementation is at Towneplace Suites.
"did the sign actually keep the smokers away or were there scofflaws at the pool? "
I did not observe any breaches of the policy. The pool deck is quite large and surrounded by vegetation including thick hedgerows. Depending upon one's approach, there are clearly marked Designated Smoking Zones that are tastefully placed and furnished so that guests can sit and enjoy tobacco without encroaching upon others.
Free will trumps these ordinances--see the number of drivers with cell phones illegally placed next to their ears as an example.
I've noticed that smokers consider their Marriott patio or balcony OK for puffing, and then enter the room to exhale that last carcinogenic puff inside. Theoretically they are not smoking in their rooms, just polluting the air.
Without effective fines and stricter no smoking on property rules there will always be those who interpret the no-smoking ideas as they see fit.
"Free will trumps these ordinances. Without effective fines and stricter no smoking on property rules there will always be those who interpret the no-smoking ideas as they see fit."
As long as I do not have to breathe second-hand smoke or come into involuntary contact with any debris related to tobacco use I really do not care about someone else's inclination to pull the trump card with free will. Marriott's smoke-free rules in conjuction with proactive housekeeping and loss prevention heighten my expectations about a smoke-free hotel environment. If Marriott does not deliver on that promise, I'm not shy about asking for a refund.
You're very right about the residual. When the dust settles, it's called third-hand smoke. See Elitepro's post earlier in the discussion and ABC's online video published 1/08/2009:
In a bold stroke nearly 3 years ago, Marriott announced that all hotels across 10 brands in North America including the US and Canada would be smoke-free. It was the lodging industry's largest move to a smoke-free environment.* Commenting in his blog, Bill Marriott said, "we made this decision because we knew it's what our customers wanted. And it certainly is what our associates deserved."**
We were 'smoked away' at one Marriott recently. Two guests staying across the hall from our executive suite at a Fairfield Inn in Massachusetts decided to light up in the hallway right outside of our room! We were getting ready to head to the breakfast room when the smell of smoke began filtering through the door. Unbelievable. Luckily, housekeeping was there to witness it. I called the Front Desk immediately to report it and they came up to investigate.
Our neighbors checked in right after us the night before. The operations manager failed to highlight the smoke-free policy at check-in as many front desk personnel do at Marriott. We requested check-out, the manager understood. Later, we received a call from the General Manager who offered to credit my account in full as compensation for the inconvenience.
Unfortunately, there are guests who will indulge in tobacco use with complete disregard for policy and others well-being. Massachusetts is among a handful of states where smoke-free legislation is by muncipal ordinance. As the map*** below shows, most of the state has enacted smoke-free laws regarding the percentage of hotel and motel rooms that must be smoke-free. Marriott is clearly ahead of the curve, promising guests a 100% smoke-free room.
"Perhaps the fine should be raised for doing it in a room or balcony with NO exceptions."
I think that signs on the front doors, guest room doors and card key sleeves are insufficient. Where front desk personnel are proactive in verbally advising guests of the smoke free policy and the $250 room recovery fee at check-in, it is more effective.
The operations manager that checked us in and the couple behind us failed to do this. It makes a huge difference if the front desk connects eye to eye and alerts guests that the policy is strictly enforced and the penalties for not observing the policy. Because the front desk failed, the GM felt accountable for offering compensation - refund of our room charge plus tax. Unfortunately for the hotel, failure to notify has a double impact. The guest who did not comply can easily dispute the room recovery fee.
To your point, I think that raising the Room Recovery Fee from $250 to $500 would convey how serious Marriott is about maintaining a smoke-free environment for guests.
Agree but the smokers got off free--and you were inconvenienced--ignorance of a rule is not a defense for the persos smoking--the Marriott campaign to end smoking is long in place, but those who choose to ignore it do so with full knowledge--now let's up the consequences!
"the Marriott campaign to end smoking is long in place, but those who choose to ignore it do so with full knowledge--now let's up the consequences! "
You're MORE passionate about this topic than I thought! I'm actually thankful that it was merely an inconvenience.
During a timeshare stay last year, repeated exposure to tobacco smoke at entranceways, elevator landings and balconies (where ashtrays were located) triggered upper respiratory reactions that required emergency medical attention for a family member. Although the property did have a smoke-free policy in place, the lack of signage combined with the positioning of ashtrays encouraged smokers to indulge.
The situation was escalated past the GM to MVCI corporate. The desired outcome was achieved. In response to the feedback, the GM implemented new signage, "No Smoking Beyond This Point" and relocated ashtrays to be 10 feet+ from all entranceways.
While I agree that it's time to "up the consequences", direction from corporate is imperative. Each GM must provide loss prevention cross-training and hold his/her staff accountable for communicating policy and enforcing it. In a worst case scenario, where a guest lights up in the hallway or stairwell, there could be a tragic fire. Tragedy could be lessened because Marriott has sprinklered buildings. The guest might be taken into custody and indicted.
While a higher room recovery fee might be effective, everyone could use a reminder. So upping the consequences for associates who fail to communicate policy should be considered too.
At times and at various Marriott properties in the US I have been asked to sign or initial a statement acknowledging the no-smoking policies, or face the fine.
Perhaps that is not enough? Time will tell, but we need deterrence to stop the flagrant disregard of some for the health of all!
"At times and at various Marriott properties in the US I have been asked to sign or initial a statement acknowledging the no-smoking policies, or face the fine."
That's a good solution, Stepping. Management is accountable for formulating the policy statement. The front desk is accountable for communicating policy at check-in. By confirming notification the guest is accountable for paying the fine for not complying.
Thanks for posting your note.
"Gladly signed my first contract for non-smoking at the very nice Fairfield in Effingham, Il. It surprised me at first, but if it works, I am all for it!"
A 'contract' approach is a huge step in the right direction and provides an excellent solution towards reaching a highly desirable goal - CLEANER AIR.
During a holiday visit with cousins in metro Chicago, I recall that Smoke Free Illinois* made headlines in 2004. The grass roots coalition of local groups, health advocates, policy makers and citizens started initiated a crusade for a smoke-free workplace. It took them 4 years, but state legislation was signed by the governor banning smoking after January 1, 2008 in public places and all workplaces including restaurants, bars ~and~ casinos.
At the heart of their campaign which was extremely effective was to reduce unnecessary death due to lung cancer, coronary heart disease, asthma, bronchitis, pneumonia and sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) associated with exposure to secondhand smoke. Contrary to fears, the economics of a smoke free policy helped to improve business including hotel stays ***.
"The no-smoking rule is one of my reasons for staying at Marriott."
With Marriott in Illinois demonstrating an effective approach**, I hope Marriott continues to be ahead of the curve implementing this front desk process at check-in nationwide.
Me too--glad that a nonsmoking contract is offered! I see this as a health and safety issue for Marriott as wellas for its guests. Other chains may allow smoking but Marriott has led the way in making the hotels smoke-free.
For any rule to be followed, we need to have a couple of things: the rule must make sense to all who are asked to follow it; the rule must have consequences if it is not followed; and the policy enforcing that rule must be absolutely iron-clad--no exceptions.
We're almost there--the rule breakers do not see this as a rule for them, only for others. Consequences--depends. Iron-clad--the jury's out on that one
"I was on the top floor, nonsmoking floor. Upon smelling smoke in the hallway near the door of my corner room, I found two smokers in the stairwell, and reported the problem to the front desk. They sent security up and I was later told that the violators had been required to check out of the hotel and the GM comp'ed me 20K points. "
Like Illinois, Florida is a bell-weather and has strict smoke-free legislation on the books. While compensation for a policy breach is what it is, I agree with you - following-through and delivering on the promise for a smoke-free environment tops my list.
At the Courtyard Hartford Windsor recently, I walked into a 1 bedroom king suite where it was very apparent that someone had been smoking in the living room area. The room opened up to the courtyard through sliding doors and a cigarette butt was clearly visible.
The Front Desk was very responsive, offering to change rooms immediately, bring the keys and assist with the luggage. En route to the new room, I asked what steps are being considered to alert guests of the smoke-free policy at check-in.
I was hoping to hear something along the lines of signing a contract at check-in, but it didn't come up. Although this experience is the exception rather than the rule, it was still an inconvenience to have to move. I could have, but did not press for compensation because the Front Desk was so responsive.
Spending $$ to recover the room is Marriott's loss. At this point, I have no idea if a guest contract at check-in is effective or not. Even though a guest signs it, how can Marriott really prove that it was the guest unless a staff member actually sees it in response to a guest complaint?
The inertia has set in--the ability of anyone to comply with a rule degrades with the time that passes since the rule went into effect, Look at the no cell phones while driving rules--the scofflaws seem to be more and more flagrant these days and the police seemingly less willing to cite them. The rule's implementation was greeted with near total adherence but soon fell off.
Additionally, the fines imposed (if they are) seem not to deter the smokers. Ionization of these rooms and other deep cleaning never quite clears the air (so to speak).
Wish I had an answer, but the real problem seems to be that attempting to model good behavior without making that behavior expensive and undesirable is a lost cause. Perhap a survey of all Marriotts that we collectively stay in, dates and experiences with smoked-in rooms would help the corporation gage the scope of the problem.
I agree that 100% compliance is unlikely to happen w/o stiffer penalties. To your point about scofflaws, in New York, every moving violation is assigned a certain number of points that count against your right to drive. Why not do the same to repeat smoking offenders?
What if breaches to the smoke-free policy are tracked using the Marriott Rewards ID or other ID? In other words, exception tracking. By looking at the record of incidents where the guest was fined, the Front Desk could automatically alert the guest that a guest contract must be signed and a hold in the amount of 2x the Room Recovery Fee would be placed on his/her credit card.
Since the vast majority of guests do not smoke, the red flag would never go up. Even if such a process were introduced across the board as change management, the risk for most guests is zero. But, Marriott would send a very clear message to all guests that every property is smoke-free and Marriott is serious about it.
In the case of repeat offenders, perhaps the guest contract at check-in should include not only a Room Recovery Fee but also agreement that a breach of the smoke-free policy reduces the Marriott Rewards points balance and/or the nights qualifying towards Elite status and/or suspension of membership?
If Marriott were to employ any of these approaches, I would not object. My risk is zero. The first step towards a solution is tracking. This would speed up check-in by eliminating the need for across-the-board guest contracts, it would protect the hotel from scofflaws who smoke and refuse to pay their fines AND it would reduce if not eliminate the inconvenience and potential cost that arises when a non-smoking guest checks-in.
Voila. Ode to the last puff!
Insurance companies ask if you smoke, grocery stores do not allow smoking, most states restrict or outlaw smoking in public places, yet hotels continue to see violations. Perhaps TJC is correct--we need a system of smoking records tied to the Marriott Rewards account.
Once there is a consequence their might be a reaction and perhaps even a desire NOT to violate the Marriott policy on smoking?
"I'd say the most eyebrow-raising comment came from reader Zipptydoda, who revealed a way to beat the ban"
Great stuff. This is exactly what Marriott management and Loss Prevention Services needs to read and figure out a way to track. Residual smoke in a hotel room is a turnoff to the vast majority of non-smokers and even some smokers too. A guest who does not object to residual smoke should send up the red flag immediately.
Marriott management needs to aware of 'ban crashing.'
To your point about driving with cellphones, the New York Times started this series of articles today: Driven to Distraction
I wonder if there is a parallel with Marriott? Is enforcement of the smoke-free policy lip service? Has anyone actually seen anything more than signage and numbers with a dollar sign? How prevalent is the guest contract or is that only used in Illinois?
Marriott Insiders is an online travel community where Marriott Rewards members enjoy the freedom to discuss topics of interest.
It's not certain why the original poster who started this discussion used a title, 'AMS' when the content of the initial message is clearly about Marriott's smoke-free policy. Perhaps it was an oversight? No attempt to hijack discussion about Amsterdam has been made or even contemplated.
As noted earlier, Marriott's policy went into effect in 2006 in response to several factors including but not limited to statutory requirements, concerns for associate work conditions and guest feedback. The frequency of smoking related reports is increasing. It impacts customer experience and the cost of operations.
Whether the increase is due to guest arrogance or lax enforcement by Loss Prevention Services, the Front Desk or management, Marriott needs to know that the increased incidence represents a failure in service delivery. Someone at Marriott needs to take ownership.
Given the number of contributors here, be assured that meaningful discussion of this topic will continue and you are most welcome to participate. Regrets for the disappointment. That said, Amsterdam Advice or TripAdvisor may be of interest.
In the marriott Orlando World center hotel, it says in the hotel's guide, in the room, that the balcony is a place where people are allowed to smoke. Unbelievable to me, and apparently to many in here, but the fact remains the management DID NOT change it when I objected.
I've seen many posts in here where people assume the balcony is smoke free..which I would expect too..and yet the guide says what it says. Now that I know this, I cannot ever stay in that hotel again until it is changed.
I hope everyone reads their room guest services guides and complains to Marriott each and every time they see something this absurd.
While I am hypersensitive and allergic to residual smoke and dust contamination, I have stayed at the Orlando World Center many times on business and leisure and never experienced a problem. Prior to 2006, I do recall that the hotel had specific floors designated as smoking and non-smoking. I feel fortunate not to encounter what you describe.
The MOWC has several of the best restaurants in Orlando, a great spa and outstanding pool. What you uncover is an eye opener and you are 100% correct about the contradiction. Smoking ~is~ permitted in designated outdoor areas ~including~ guest room balconies provided the sliding door is closed: http://resorts.affordabletours.com/search/Property/resorts/482/
There are very clear references to Marriott hotel smoking policy and the ~prohibition~ of smoking not only in the guest room but also on the balcony, online. Sad to say, inconsistency like the one pointed out inadvertedly encourages the smoking behavior that the Marriott smoke-free policy prohibits.
Although Orlando is a very popular destination and accessible by car, MOWC has been struggling with occupancy this past year. More than 80% of the traveling public is non-smoking and prefer a smoke-free environment both inside and outside. Perhaps its time management connects-the-dots and restores confidence.
As Jerry comments, thank you for pointing it out.
We've stayed at Marriott World Center a few times over the past 5 or 6 years and never once experienced a smoking nuisance, even when they had smoking floors and smoking was permitted in the lobby, but thanks for affirming my decision to stay at the JW Orlando a few weeks ago instead of the Marriott World Center. At the JW, over the course of a week, we never saw, smelled, or sensed at all any tobacco smoke, including on the golf course.
Hard to imagine a "totally smoke-free" policy that permits smoking on the balcony. What a joke!
Seems to me that the property needs to change this, and make balconies off limits. Florida's clean air laws, though later to the game than some, are fairly tough--the airports are smoke free as are most if not all public buildings.
Just got back from Shadow Ridge in Palm Desert where the balconies are off limits to smokers, except for someone in our building. A call to AYS fixed the problem. But it was amazing to me that a person would book a stay in a completely nonsmoking property knowing the fines and the hassle that other guests will give them. Other places in the desert may still offer smoking rooms, like the casinos (Indian run) where it's all smoking all the time.
So, I repeat myself--the fines need to be upped, the whole chain needs to be on the same page, and we can eradicate this pollution from places we stay.
I agree that management at the property is responsible. As stated in Hotel Smoking Policies at the Insiders Lobby:
"Ultimately, the management of each property really has to take ownership of the policy and see to it that Loss Prevention, Housekeeping and the Front Desk are vigilant about enforcement."
i am a haevy smoker 60 a 75 cigarettes per day
in not long time you dont cant smoke only in
hotels. no in the strret , and possible
in your own home. possible on the ather site
from your home you have many non smokers.
in europe and asie? there you find hotels
for smoker and non smokers.
and i hope this will never end.
you in the usa you get the gun very easy
verbidden in europe. and whe in europe
whe get the cicarrettes very easy, for smoking
in many place.
whe smoker whe lucky smoker.
i know i am allone with this position
here, please dont take your gun and
Klaus, it is not a matter of smoking but a matter of rights, mine and yours. While it is your right to smoke, it is my right and the rights of about 70% of Americans who do not smoke, to prevent you from smoking in my presence or my hotel space. If this were an issue of eating candy in a hotel it would be different: no one except you and perhaps your teeth are harmed by that behavior. Smoking harms me and you at the same time.
It is not unreasonable to expect smoke free places when we travel--even pubs in Ireland, the underground in London and many other places are smoke free.
So, please continue to smoke as you please but recall that your right to do so is restricted by our right (equally as important) not to be bothered by that smoke.
Klaus, ce n'est pas une question de tabagisme, mais une question de droits, le miens et le vôs. Pendant que c'est votre droit de fumer, c'est mon droit et les droits d'environ 70 % d'américains qui ne fument pas, vous empêcher de fumer en ma présence ou mon espace d'hôtel. Si c'était une édition du fait de manger le bonbon dans un hôtel ce serait différent : personne sauf vous et peut-être vos dents n'est fait du mal par cette conduite. Le tabagisme me fait du mal et vous en même temps.
Il est assez raisonnable de s'attendre à la fumée les endroits libres quand nous voyageons - même les pubs en Irlande, le métro à Londres et à beaucoup d'autres endroits sont la fumée libre.
Ainsi continuez s'il vous plaît à fumer comme vous voulez, mais vous souvenir que votre droit de faire ainsi est restreint par notre droit (tout aussi comme important) pour ne pas être dérangé par cette fumée.
Klaus, das ist nicht eine Frage des Rauchens, sondern eine Frage der Rechte, und Sie meinen. Während es Ihr Recht, zu rauchen, es ist mein Recht und die Rechte von rund 70% der Amerikaner, die nicht rauchten, halten Sie das Rauchen in meiner Gegenwart oder meinem Hotelzimmer. Wenn es eine Ausgabe von Essen die Süßigkeiten in einem Hotel, das anders sein würde: niemand außer Ihnen und vielleicht Ihre Zähne durch dieses Verhalten geschädigt werden. Rauchen schadet dir und mir zusammen. Es ist durchaus sinnvoll, nach Irland zu erwarten rauchfreie Plätze, wenn wir reisen - auch in den Pubs, London U-Bahn und viele andere Orte sind der Rauch Free. Also bitte weiter zu rauchen, wie Sie wollen, aber denken Sie daran, dass Ihr Recht zu tun, wichtig ist) nicht so begrenzt ist durch unser Recht (ebenso zu rauchen, die belästigt werden, durch.
No one here is going to kill you, but you may be doing it to yourself...... Those of us that travel overseas understand that smoking is still an accepted practice in many places and when in your country would be tolerant of your habit. However, between the damage smoking causes the smoker AND the risks of second-hand smoke, non-smoking facilities are the norm here is the usa and the vast majority of us are happy about it. By the way, this comes from a 2 pack a day smoker until 3 years ago. I quit and have never looked back, you might try the same. We like having you around
Klaus please heed our advice and quit while you can--the medical evidence that quitting saves your life is amazing and plentiful. We need your insights to keep this forum moving at a good clip.
Klaus beachten Sie bitte unseren Rat und hören Sie auf, während Sie - die medizinischen Beweise können, dass das Verlassen spart, ist Ihr Leben erstaunlich und reichlich. Wir brauchen Ihre Einblicke, um dieses Forum zu behalten, das sich an einer guten Büroklammer bewegt.
Klaus faites s'il vous plaît attention à notre conseil et arrêtez pendant que vous pouvez - l'évidence médicale que le quittant sauve votre vie est stupéfiant et abondant. Nous avons besoin de vos pénétrations pour garder ce forum bougeant à un bon clip.
thank you for all intentiom for me.
here is only one probleme how whe can make
smoker and non smoker
to stay in good terms together.
when i see on the balcony you can smoke
exemple 11 floor from the hotel
where is the probleme for a non smoker to
closed the window for 10 minites when he
stay on the 12 floors.
whiss very simple thinks whe can help us each uther
dear stepping stones
the medical evidence .no
yes to smoke is a possibility for get a hard ataque ou loung
cancer.only a possibility but today nathing is prouve.
why you have more at 60 prozent from the medical staff
why go ted every day many young man sportive what
play ou football ou ather sport never smoke 1 cigarette.
what eat mutch vegeteble colosterrol free and this
young peaple go ted. look the fermier from france
in the morning a good feet saucisson ,a soup ,no coffee
but redwine and when finisch this special breakfast
a good cigarette. this peaple what work very hard
every day go det all between 80 and 100years
no whe very long from the medical evidence
Dear Klaus, I am sure you understand the concept of free will and know that every individual makes choices about what they do--but in the case of smoking your choice effects those around you.
If for example you decided that lighting a firecracker in your hotel room was a good idea, the hotel would not see it that way.
Thus, medical evidence aside, (and there is no dissent on the harmful effects of tobacco on the smoker and on the people around the smoker) the notion of smoking is not popular and has become a bad thing to do.
As you know the habit became popular when the English brought tobacco from the new world to the old, Sir Walter Raleigh being one of the early proponents, as I recall. The social aspects of smoking were most popular in the 1930s, 40s and 50s. Friends told me that they smoked as children during their lean years to prevent hunger! They of course are no longer here, having succumbed to lung cancer.
For those who smoke I cheer their independence to do so but question their ability to ignore the good reasoning that science brings to the habit about quitting. I also know that I and many others do not want to "enjoy" the habit ourselves by being nearby in a hotel.