You clearly don't understand this condition
You obviously do not have sensitivity to fragrances so you have no idea what it is like to suffer with this condition. For the person who is affected it is not about money, it is about their health. It is their number 1 priority, followed closely by their need to earn a living like anyone else, if that is even possible for them. You have no idea of the psychological, social and financial impact this condition has on those who suffer with it, while much of this can be avoided by some basic consideration in choosing and wearing personal products more wisely and more considerately. If a person is so attached to their favorite scent then they should wear it and enjoy it at home. More often than not they wear it on 'special occasions' or when they go 'out' so they 'smell nice' aka make others sick. Doh!!! It makes no sense. ie If I had wanted to smell your perfume I would have bought it and worn it myself, but since I haven't because it makes me sick, then i really don't want you to come near me at all. This might help people understand why others may not spend time close to them if they are wearing fragrances.
A third of the population have some kind of a reaction to fragrances. There is a reason that places like the CDC have a fragrance-free environment. "CDC encourages employees to be as fragrance-free as possible when they arrive in the workplace. Fragrance is not appropriate for a professional work environment, and the use of some products with fragrance may be detrimental to the health of workers with chemical sensitivities, allergies, asthma, and chronic headaches/migraines. Employees should avoid using scented detergents and fabric softeners on clothes worn to the office. Many fragrance-free personal care and laundry products are easily available and provide safer alternatives." Also, studies have shown that it is more cost effective to accommodate people with sensitivities than to bear the costs of not accommodating them.
What about people who are in classrooms trying to get an education and being badly affected by these fragrances? Is their motivation to avoid asthma attacks, coughing attacks and headaches etc really financially driven, or is it more about having access to a safe and healthy learning environment so they might too have half a chance of future employment? Such close environments can mean affected people cannot access them. Think about public transport, taxis, health services, etc it really makes for a very difficult life. Anti-discrimination laws obviously still have a long way to go.
Fragrances contain chemicals that are known to be allergens, irritants/sensitizers, carcinogens, neurotoxins, and endocrine disruptors. Why would one ever ethically consider that the right to pump such chemicals into the air is more valued than the right to breath fresh air and the right to not be slowly poisoned by those chemicals. If people want to actively poison themselves then that is their business, but to impose that on others, well that is a different story.
Shall we re-visit all the arguments that have gone before us with respect to the introduction of smoking bans? It is exactly the same thing! Be thankful for the sensitives who are giving us all fair warning of what is in store for humanity.