GAITHERSBURG, Md. – Taking a smoke break is getting tougher for some employees, particularly those employed by companies looking to trim healthcare expenses and protect their staff from secondhand smoke by banning tobacco use on business property, reports the Maryland Business Gazette.

The "tougher measures," notes the newspaper, are fueled by reports such as one from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) that says that smokers cost a company "an average of $3,391 annually in lost productivity and medical costs" and that cigarette smoking is "the leading preventable cause of death in the United States."

Two large Maryland-based companies, Lockheed Martin and Greater Baltimore Medical Center, have banned smoking anywhere on company property, including the parking lots. Bethesda, Maryland-based hotelier Marriott International recently announced a ban on smoking in all of its estimated 400,000 rooms in the United States and Canada. Sterling, Virginia-based property management company Centrum Management LLC bans residents from smoking in its rental units, writes the newspaper.

Nationwide, companies such as Marysville, Ohio-based Scotts Miracle-Gro Co. has made a pledge not to hire smokers, while Okemos, Michigan-based employee benefits company Weyco reportedly fired existing employees who smoke. However, Weyco officials say those employees opted out of the company's program and decided to leave on their own accord.

Kari Appler, executive director of the Smoke Free Maryland Coalition of Baltimore, told the newspaper that wider smoking bans are "the wave of the future," but had not heard of any companies going so far as to not hire smokers.

"For many employers, this makes sense,” Appler told the newspaper, adding, "They are concerned about the message they send to employees, customers and the general public.”

Meanwhile, according to Michael J. McFadden, mid-Atlantic regional director of the Smoker’s Club, a group that works for smokers’ rights, broader corporate smoking bans "are misguided and discriminatory." He told the newspaper that companies "could conceivably save money by targeting nonsmokers who theoretically cost more in pension expenses because they tend to live longer."

"Smoking decisions in individual businesses should be based on the needs and desires of their customers and workers,” McFadden told the newspaper, adding that smoking should not be used "as a litmus test for something as vital to fundamental rights as being considered for a job."