Category Archives: Liability

by | November 1, 2010 · 12:04 pm

Hospitality Industry Employee Safety And Wage Issues: Hotel Management Should Expect 2011 OSHA Regulations To Require A Written “Injury And Illness Protection Progam” And Dept. Of Labor (DOL) Rule Requiring Full Disclosure On “Worker’s Pay Computation”

 

  • The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) is developing a regulation mandating that employers have a written health and safety program, referred to as an Injury and Illness Protection Program or “I2P2.”
  • This rule would give an OSHA investigator the authority to find that an injury should have been avoided even if it was not regulated under a specific standard.
  • OSHA will also publish a regulation that will require employers to analyze every employee injury to determine if it is a work-related recordable musculoskeletal injury.
  • This regulation would set the stage for OSHA to revive its controversial ergonomics standard.

 

  • The Wage and Hour Division at DOL has a highly anticipated rule that would greatly expand recordkeeping requirements under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)
  • It would require employers to disclose how a worker’s pay is computed and complete a written “classification analysis” for each worker who is exempt or outside of the coverage of the FLSA.

For more:   http://www.worldtrademag.com/Articles/Column/BNP_GUID_9-5-2006_A_10000000000000932009

Comments Off on Hospitality Industry Employee Safety And Wage Issues: Hotel Management Should Expect 2011 OSHA Regulations To Require A Written “Injury And Illness Protection Progam” And Dept. Of Labor (DOL) Rule Requiring Full Disclosure On “Worker’s Pay Computation”

Filed under Health, Injuries, Labor Issues, Legislation, Liability, Risk Management, Training, Uncategorized

Tagged as , , , , , , ,

by | October 31, 2010 · 12:44 pm

Hotel Industry Employee Risk Management: Employee’s Use Of Stairs In Multi-Story Hotels Subject Them To “Significantly Greater Risk Of Injury” And Result In Higher Workers’ Compensation Benefits

“Because the employees’ periodic breaks were mandatory, Phillips was required to use the staircase six times during each shift. In fact, in its opening brief, Rio calculated that during the course of Phillips’ 17-year employment, she traversed the stairs approximately 25,000 times,’
 
“…the court concluded that the frequency with which Phillips was required to use the stairs subjected her to a significantly greater risk of injury than the risk faced by the general public. Consequently, Phillips should be awarded benefits, the high court wrote…”
 

The Nevada Supreme Court has ruled that although employers are not “absolutely liable” when employees are injured “on the job,” companies should apply the “increased risk test” to determine whether they are entitled to workers’ compensation benefits.

The justices explained the increased risk test in Rio All Suite Hotel & Casino v. Phillips. According to court documents, Kathryn Phillips was a poker and blackjack dealer at the Rio All Suite Hotel & Casino in Las Vegas. While taking her mandatory 20-minute break during her usual eight-hour shift, she walked down the stairs to the employee break room, slipped, and fractured her ankle.

Her treating physician determined her injury was work related, and Phillips had surgery to repair her ankle. But Rio’s third-party administrator, Sedgwick CMS, denied her claim saying Phillips did not prove the injury arose out of her employment.

“The types of risks that an employee may encounter during employment are categorized as “those that are solely employment related, those that are purely personal, and those that are neutral,” the high court said.

 

 

 

Comments Off on Hotel Industry Employee Risk Management: Employee’s Use Of Stairs In Multi-Story Hotels Subject Them To “Significantly Greater Risk Of Injury” And Result In Higher Workers’ Compensation Benefits

Filed under Claims, Injuries, Insurance, Labor Issues, Liability, Risk Management

Tagged as , , ,

by | October 30, 2010 · 5:26 am

Hospitality Industry Fire Risk Management: “Security Alert! Check The Security Of Your Hotel’s Knox Boxes Frequently” By Todd Seiders, CLSD, Petra Risk Solutions

Risk Management

by Todd Seiders, CLSD

Check your Knox Boxes! A Knox Box, known officially as the KNOX-BOX Rapid Entry System, is a small, wall-mounted safe-like box that holds building keys for firefighters and EMTs to retrieve in emergencies. In many jurisdictions, the local Fire Department requires that a Knox Box be located outside of your hotel (check with your local Fire Department for requirements; some jurisdictions may not require hotels to have one), for their use only, in the event of an emergency. The Knox Box has a complete set of the hotel’s master keys locked inside this box.

Knox Boxes simplify key control for local fire departments. Local fire companies can hold master keys to all such boxes in their response area, so that they can quickly enter a building without having to force entry or find individual keys held in deposit at the fire station. Sometimes Knox Boxes are linked via radio to the dispatch station, where the dispatcher can release the keys with telecommunication tone signaling over analog phone lines.

Knox Boxes have advantages and disadvantages for both business owners and emergency responders. The main advantage for their use is that they cut fire losses for building owners since firefighters can more quickly enter buildings without breaking doors or windows. The disadvantage of the system is that it provides a single point of failure for security. If the key to a district’s Knox Boxes is stolen or copied, a thief can enter any building that has a Knox Box. Likewise, if the locking mechanism or structural integrity of the box is compromised, a thief can gain access to the keys and hence access to the entire building. For this reason some building owners wire Knox Boxes into their burglar alarm systems so that opening the box trips the alarm, thus negating its use in facilitating clandestine entry.

 
 
 
 

Todd Seiders, CLSD, is director of risk management for Petra Risk Solutions, which provides a full-range of risk management and insurance services for hospitality owners and operators. Their website is: www.petrarisksolutions.com. Todd can be reached at 800-466-8951 or via e-mail at: todds@petrarisksolutions.com.)

 

Knox Boxes are an actual miniature safe designed to withstand tampering and are built in a variety of sizes ranging from a box designed for two keys to one designed to hold hazardous material information and multiple keys. Prices start at approximately $250.00. Most Knox Boxes are mounted onto a wood or steel mounting with the screws or bolts covered.

Yet, this does not mean that Knox Boxes are indestructible or cannot be removed from their mounting with force. We have recently seen many of these Knox Boxes forcefully removed from their wall mountings and stolen from the property. In several cases the thieves then returned to the hotel with the master keys and stole items.

In one theft at a hotel the thieves specifically used the master keys to access the storage room for the hotel night audit packets and guest files. The thieves stole hundreds of night audit packets containing the names, addresses and credit card numbers of previous guests. Obviously, hotels can be held liable for breach of guests’ personal information or loss of their credit card data.

So, what should hoteliers do? Secure your night audit packets/files in a secure room that has a hard metal key, rather than a magnetic key card lock. There should only be one or two hotel employees that have access to the night audit storage room, and storage room keys. Secure these files separately, and control all access to them. DO NOT include a key to this storage room in your Knox Box, or on your “master key ring”, or even leave this key unattended in a key box. The night audit file storage room key should be kept separate from all other keys.

As for the hotel’s Knox Box, local ordinances may require that your property have a Knox Box in the event of an emergency. If so, follow these suggestions:

  • Check that your Knox Box is solidly secured to its location, using numerous heavy duty screws or bolts to make it extremely hard to remove.

 

  • Relocate your Knox Box to a well lit area, and in view of security cameras, if your property has them.

 

  • Add a visual inspection of the Knox Box to your property inspection form and security tours so it will be inspected on a regular basis. This will let you know in a timely manner if someone has tried to remove it, or has in fact actually removed or damaged. Immediately re-key the entire hotel if the Knox Box is stolen or the keys inside come up missing. 

 

Pictured above: Here’s what some of the various Knox Boxes look like.

(Todd Seiders, CLSD, is director of risk management for Petra Risk Solutions, which provides a full-range of risk management and insurance services for hospitality owners and operators. Their website is: www.petrarisksolutions.com. Todd can be reached at 800-466-8951 or via e-mail at: todds@petrarisksolutions.com.)  

Comments Off on Hospitality Industry Fire Risk Management: “Security Alert! Check The Security Of Your Hotel’s Knox Boxes Frequently” By Todd Seiders, CLSD, Petra Risk Solutions

Filed under Crime, Insurance, Liability, Management And Ownership, Risk Management, Theft

Tagged as , , ,

by | October 29, 2010 · 5:45 am

Hotel Industry Security Risk Management: “Fingerprint Entry Systems” Are Starting To Become More Common As A “Reliable” Guest Security Option

If you want to get into your room at New York’s SoHo Loft, you’re going to have to lift a finger. The seven-room hotel has a fingerprint entry system. Guests touch the door pad then enter a code for extra security. Kimpton’s 190-room Nine Zero Hotel in Boston was the first hotel to install a biometric iris scanner back in 2004, but only guests of the 1,065-square-foot Cloud Nine penthouse suite have to bat their eyelashes.

Those plastic key cards that once seemed so innovative will soon go the way of the actual key. The new thing is contact less Smartcards and RFID (Radio Frequency Identification) cards that need just be waved to allow room access.

Much like the cruise world’s one card system, these cards may soon make hotel stays easier by allowing guests to pay for services, as well as to check-in and check-out, through a single device. Travelers may even be able to save preferences on the cards, from pillow type to floor choice. RFID cards are already in use at New York’s Plaza Hotel, and Starwood Hotels are considering introducing them into their hip Aloft and Element properties.

But travelers worried they will constantly have to traipse back to reception every time they lose their card need not despair. Security systems in some hotels do away with cards altogether.

 “In addition to Radio Frequency Identification, there are also systems that use a smartphone, such as an iPhone,” says Frank Wolfe, CEO of Hospitality Financial and Technology Professionals. “When a guest checks into a hotel and provides their phone number, they get an encrypted sound code via text message.” You can then play back the code to unlock your room door.

Yet more card-free security systems are on the way. They may still be minor blips on the greater hotel horizon, but biometric systems that seem right out of Mission Impossible have been introduced in the U.S. If you want to get into your room at New York’s SoHo Loft, you’re going to have to lift a finger. The seven-room hotel has a fingerprint entry system. Guests touch the door pad then enter a code for extra security. Kimpton’s 190-room Nine Zero Hotel in Boston was the first hotel to install a biometric iris scanner back in 2004, but only guests of the 1,065-square-foot Cloud Nine penthouse suite have to bat their eyelashes. The uses for biometrics don’t have to stop at the guestroom door, either. The Nine Zero also uses the technology to make the property safer all round, as it has installed the LG IrisAccess 3000 at the employee and delivery entries to the hotel, as well, meaning that non-staff members and intruders can’t access the property.

For more:  http://news.travel.aol.com/2010/10/29/the-future-of-hotel-security/

8 Comments

Filed under Guest Issues, Liability, Management And Ownership, Risk Management

Tagged as , , ,

by | October 19, 2010 · 11:21 am

Hospitality Industry Information Technology: Small- To Medium-Sized Hotel Owners Should Support A “Shared-Services” Model For Data And Call Center Services

CLICK ON PICTURE TO READ ENTIRE "SHARED TECHNOLOGY REPORT"

Comments Off on Hospitality Industry Information Technology: Small- To Medium-Sized Hotel Owners Should Support A “Shared-Services” Model For Data And Call Center Services

Filed under Guest Issues, Liability, Maintenance, Management And Ownership, Training

Tagged as , ,

by | October 12, 2010 · 11:56 am

Hospitality Industry Employee Risk Issues: Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) May Require Hotel Management To Pay “Overtime Compensation” To Employees Who Use Smart-Phones “After Hours”

Under the FLSA, nonexempt employees are entitled to overtime compensation for “time spent working” beyond a 40-hour workweek. An employee does not even need to be required by the employer to work overtime but must merely do so for the employer’s benefit.

While an employee’s off-the-clock smart-phone use may amount to only a few minutes here or there—and the FLSA provides an exception for “de minimis” overtime—legal experts say an employer’s liability can mount up in a class action.

Moreover, the electronic records stored on smart phones may give an employee solid evidence on which to base an overtime claim.

     The department “has willfully violated the FLSA [Fair Labor Standards Act] by intentionally failing and refusing to pay Plaintiff and other similarly situated employees all compensation due them under the FLSA” for their after-hours Blackberry use, Sgt. Jeffrey Allen said in a suit filed in May as a proposed class action. A judge has to certify the case as a class action for it to proceed.

The case is one of a handful nationwide in which employees have claimed overtime pay for smart-phone use—and apparently the first involving public employees. But lawyers say such cases are a clear warning to employers to put a smart-phone usage policy in place before they end up in potentially costly litigation. Smart phones “are very dangerous and risky for nonexempt employees to have if you’re worried about overtime,” says Jeremy A. Roth, a partner at San Diego law firm Littler Mendelson. 

The case is one of a handful nationwide in which employees have claimed overtime pay for smart-phone use—and apparently the first involving public employees. But lawyers say such cases are a clear warning to employers to put a smart-phone usage policy in place before they end up in potentially costly litigation. Smart phones “are very dangerous and risky for nonexempt employees to have if you’re worried about overtime,” says Jeremy A. Roth, a partner at San Diego law firm Littler Mendelson.

For more:   http://www.workforce.com/section/legal/feature/legal-static-over-issuing-smart-phones-workers/index.html

Comments Off on Hospitality Industry Employee Risk Issues: Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) May Require Hotel Management To Pay “Overtime Compensation” To Employees Who Use Smart-Phones “After Hours”

Filed under Labor Issues, Liability, Management And Ownership, Risk Management, Training

Tagged as

by | October 7, 2010 · 5:49 pm

Hospitality Industry Risk Management: Hotel Owner Must Review “Employment Practices Liability Insurance” Coverage Language To Determine If It Covers “Wage And Hour” Lawsuits

 In Professional Security Consultants, Inc. v. United States Fire Insurance Co., Case No. CV 10-04588 SJO (SSx), Judge James Otero recently denied an EPL insurer’s motion to dismiss a complaint seeking coverage for costs incurred to defend and settle an underlying wage and hour class action.    

The exclusionary language at issue was typical of such exclusions, barring coverage “for violations of the responsibilities, obligations or duties imposed by…the Fair Labor Standard Act…or similar provisions of any federal, state or local or foreign statutory or common law.”

The underlying litigation alleged that employer Professional Security Consultants (“PSC”) violated various provisions of the California Labor Code, including wrongfully withholding overtime compensation. PSC was insured under an EPL policy issued by United States Fire (“US Fire”). US Fire moved to dismiss the coverage action on the basis of its “FLSA” (Fair Labor Standards Act) Exclusion. Citing California law regarding the breadth and scope of an insurer’s duty to defend, the court denied US Fire’s motion.

The court noted that the policy’s definition of an “Employment Practices Wrongful Act” included “employment-related misrepresentations.” Comparing this policy language to the allegations of the complaint, the court emphasized the underlying plaintiffs’ allegation that PSC “[d]isseminated false information throughout [PSC’s] facilities and amongst [PSCs] employees, reciting that, under [PSC’s] labor policies and practices and under California law, the members of the Illegal Wages Class were not entitled to overtime compensation.” The complaint therefore alleged “employment-related misrepresentations,” triggering the potential for coverage under the policy.

The court also rejected US Fire’s argument that there was no potential indemnity coverage because any amounts allegedly owed to the underlying Plaintiffs were not covered “Loss” under the policy. The court observed that the policy’s definition of covered Loss included “damages,” and that the underlying complaint expressly sought to recover damages.

For more:  http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=75f1cf83-81de-43a4-8217-45ef67ed56ec

Comments Off on Hospitality Industry Risk Management: Hotel Owner Must Review “Employment Practices Liability Insurance” Coverage Language To Determine If It Covers “Wage And Hour” Lawsuits

Filed under Claims, Insurance, Labor Issues, Liability, Management And Ownership, Risk Management

Tagged as , ,

by | October 5, 2010 · 5:39 pm

Hospitality Industry Guest Relations: “Problem Prevention” Is The Key To Customer Satisaction

J.D. Power and Associates continues to observe that high levels of customer satisfaction are dependent on problem prevention, rather than problem resolution. That is not to say that service recovery is not required when a guest experiences a significant problem; however, it is more difficult to achieve the satisfaction level of those guests who don’t experience a problem in the first place, than for guests who experience problems that are eventually resolved.

Across the industry, overall satisfaction is 144 points higher when guests did not experience a significant problem (781), compared with when they did (637). While there is a significant gap in satisfaction among the guests for whom the problem was resolved (705), compared with those for whom the problem remained unresolved (582), satisfaction still falls significantly below that of guests who did not experience a problem in the first place.

While it is possible to so impress and exceed a guest’s expectations during recovery that they are more satisfied after recovery than if they never had a problem, these are rare occurrences.  We certainly would not advocate creating false problems in order to heroically swoop in and solve the problems for guests as a business model, but it does reinforce the important opportunity recovery represents. It makes a statement to guests about your brand and how you value their business.

You might wonder, what are the most frequently occurring problems that guests cite?

Across the industry, the top three problems guests cited are:

  1. Noise
  2. Hotel/room maintenance
  3. Heating ventilation and AC problems

For more:  http://www.hotelnewsnow.com/Articles.aspx/4128/Guest-problems-better-prevented-than-resolved

2 Comments

Filed under Guest Issues, Labor Issues, Liability, Management And Ownership, Risk Management, Training

Tagged as , , ,

by | October 4, 2010 · 6:24 am

Hotel Theft Risks: Florida Law Protects Hotel Ownership From “Most Liability” But Continued Guest Loyalty Demands A Secure Premises

“…A… Naples, FL couple’s plans were shattered…when their motel room was burglarized shortly after they checked in and went to dinner. Everything of value — including electronics, cash, a designer purse and sunglasses, theme-park tickets, a passport, checks and Social Security cards — was gone when they returned…”

They… filed a police report and demanded reimbursement from the motel for the $5,200 loss, but it was denied. A Florida law protects operators of public lodgings from most liability. Even when a hotel is negligent, a guest cannot recover more than $500 in most cases and $1,000 for jewelry or cash left with the hotel for safekeeping.

In Orlando, where tourism is the engine that drives the economy, hoteliers are well aware of the need to protect their guests as much as possible, said Rich Maladecki, president of the Central Florida Hotel & Lodging Association.

Most hotels have full-time security staff and work with law enforcement to root out problems, he said. Look for hotels with good lighting in hallways, at entrances and in parking lots, experts caution.

For more:  http://www.orlandosentinel.com/features/law/os-law-and-you-hotels-tourist-rights-20100923,0,6507664.story

Comments Off on Hotel Theft Risks: Florida Law Protects Hotel Ownership From “Most Liability” But Continued Guest Loyalty Demands A Secure Premises

Filed under Crime, Guest Issues, Liability, Management And Ownership, Risk Management, Theft

Tagged as , ,

by | October 2, 2010 · 11:18 am

Hospitality Industry Employee Risks: Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) Filed A Federal Lawsuit Against Hotel Owners Alleging “Pattern Of Racial Discrimination” In Hiring Hispanics Over Black Applicants

A federal lawsuit filed Thursday by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission against the owners of an Eastside hotel claims black housekeeping employees were fired after they complained that Hispanic workers were paid more for doing the same work.

The suit, which alleges a pattern of racial discrimination against the hotel’s housekeeping staff and job applicants, also said the black workers were openly told they’d be fired and replaced because Hispanics cleaned better and complained less.

The EEOC filed the suit claiming racial discrimination on behalf of five fired employees of the Hampton Inn, 2311 N. Shadeland Ave., plus a group of black applicants who sought jobs at the hotel.

The EEOC suit also claims the hotel management destroyed employment records sought by the agency going back nearly two years. Incidents in the suit allegedly occurred from September 2008 to June 2009.

The suit seeks back pay and reinstatement for the fired employees, and it seeks unspecified compensation for other blacks denied employment on the basis of their race.

Hotel owners New Indianapolis Hotels LLC and Hement Thacker of Georgia could not be reached for comment. Attorneys in Indianapolis and Georgia, who formerly represented the hotel owner, declined comment.

Though employment records have been destroyed, the EEOC estimated about 30 to 35 applicants sought work at the hotel and may have been denied work based on their race.

For more:  http://www.indystar.com/article/20101001/LOCAL1803/10010388/1003/BUSINESS/EEOC-s-bias-suit-targets-hotel-on-Eastside

Comments Off on Hospitality Industry Employee Risks: Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) Filed A Federal Lawsuit Against Hotel Owners Alleging “Pattern Of Racial Discrimination” In Hiring Hispanics Over Black Applicants

Filed under Labor Issues, Liability, Management And Ownership, Risk Management, Training

Tagged as , , , ,