The hotel incident report may comprise only a few sentences. The report names guests, details the disturbance, names the staff who responded and records when the management was informed.
The report could raise multiple questions to an attorney. Who was responsible for supervising the employees? Was surveillance footage preserved? Did the facility follow its standard procedures? Did the property experience any prior interactions that were not recorded in the report.
These issues illustrate the reason why hospitality litigation typically necessitates an examination of standard documents of business before witness testimony begins.
Begin by looking over the documents that were made in normal operations
Records are maintained by hospitality businesses to plan guest services, training of staff and security, as well as management and much more. These records were not always designed for litigation, but they may be used to determine how the hotel operated in an incident.
A professional witness in hospitality will review the schedules of staffing as well as operating procedures, documents for employee training Security logs, security records and surveillance recordings in order to better be aware of the responsibilities attributable to different employees. As an example an example, a policy that is official may specify that the supervisor must respond to an employee who notifies them of a drunk client.
Investigating whether or not the manager actually worked in the workplace, whether or not the report was communicated, and the responses documented by the available evidence should be the goal. The goal is to evaluate the actual activities rather than inferring that written procedures were either adhered to or not followed.
The way to interpret restaurant records is different
Restaurant investigations pose challenges since employees have to divide their time between the preparation of beverages, food service the customer’s requests and dining-room management. An expert witness from a restaurant can discuss the effects of these duties on the decisions made by employees during service.
Consider a dining-room incident involving customers who have ordered alcohol at the bar prior to making the move to a table. The bar receipt can be evidence of the first purchase while the restaurant transaction records might show subsequent orders.
However, the records may not establish the information that the table server had about the earlier service. Reviewing the server assignments, transaction times notes from management, employee statements together can help clarify the sequence. It is important to distinguish: the fact that alcohol was available for sale doesn’t necessarily suggest that employees are aware of intoxication.
Casino Investigations may require different forms of documentation
Casinos offer drink packages that are different than the ones offered by eateries. Additional sources of information are complimentary drinks as well as mobile cocktail servers, and gaming floor supervisors.
A casino expert witness could analyze beverage staffing and security footage and surveillance. They can also go over processes for employee communication. Traditional sales receipts could provide an incomplete account when drinks are provided for free.
In such a case the investigation will rely more heavily on surveillance records and employee observation, service documentation, and even the process of the property’s documents. Experts must be aware of the weaknesses of evidence instead of accepting insufficient records as evidence.
Preserve the Evidence Before It is lost forever.
The preservation of documents that are sensitive is an issue for litigation involving hospitality. Surveillance systems’ records can be stored for a short duration. Different systems or departments may save employee schedules, internal communication, and incident documents. Attorneys should identify and save documents that could be relevant as quickly as possible.
The scope of the necessary investigation is contingent upon the accusations. Restaurant claims may need documentation for dining and bar areas for instance, while a resort event could need documentation for the event as well as transportation arrangements and security communications. You can identify relevant records through an investigation that is specific, not having to assume that every department was involved.
Operational Experience helps explain the Paperwork
Preston Rideout has worked in hospitality since 1996, with experience in bartending, nightclub management, and multi-unit beverage operations. Rideout Hospitality Consulting was established in 2010 and has since provided assistance to hotel, restaurant and resort operators throughout the United States.
He has served as an expert witness in the case of resorts, hotels, casinos as well as restaurants for attorneys representing defense and plaintiffs. This background in operations can be beneficial when interpreting documents that appear straightforward to someone who is not familiar with hospitality management.
A staffing schedule, for example identifies the employees who were designated to work. Knowing if the assignments offered sufficient supervision requires an understanding of the model of service for the property and operational conditions.
To build a stronger case and build a stronger case, you must ask better questions.
A thorough review of the expert’s work will aid attorneys in distinguishing between documents and unresolved issues. It may identify additional records worth requesting, help clarify operational terminology for depositions, and determine which employee decisions require more scrutiny.
There are many reasons why discrepancies may not be indicative of a failure in operation. Not every policy that shows the proper procedure was observed.
The value of hospitality experts is that they can explain the distinctions with relevant evidence and accepted industry practices. For attorneys preparing the case for a hospitality client, understanding the operation before questioning its employees can lead to a more specific, convincing investigation of what actually happened.