A hotel incident report could comprise only a few paragraphs. The report identifies guests, details the incident, names the employees who responded, and records when management was notified.
The report can raise multiple issues to an attorney. Who was accountable for supervising the employees? Was surveillance footage preserved? Did the facility follow its policies? Are there any earlier interactions which were not disclosed?
This is the reasons why it is sometimes necessary to review business records prior to when witness testimony in a lawsuit involving hospitality.
Start by reviewing the documents that were created in normal operations
Companies in the hospitality sector keep records of scheduling, guest service, training, security and management. While these records weren’t designed to be used in litigation, they can help identify how a place operated during a particular incident.
A Hospitality expert witness may examine staffing schedules, operating procedures, employee training files, security logs, and surveillance recordings to understand the responsibilities assigned to different personnel. For instance one policy may specify that the supervisor must respond to an employee who is notified of an intoxicated client.
Examining whether or not the manager actually was working in the workplace, whether or not the report was communicated, and what response is evident from the evidence available is the objective. It is more important to look at actual actions instead of assuming that written instructions were followed or ignored.
There is an need for a distinct analysis of the restaurant’s registers
Restaurant investigations present challenges because employees are split between food service, beverage preparation as well as customer demands and the management of dining rooms. An expert witness from the restaurant can explain how these responsibilities affect the decisions employees take during service.
Imagine an incident in the dining room that involves someone who bought alcohol at the bar prior to settling into an area to sit. The bar receipt can be evidence of the initial purchase, while restaurant transaction records might show subsequent orders.
The records could not provide the server’s knowledge of the prior service. Looking over server assignments, transaction time as well as management notes and employee declarations together will help clarify the sequence. It is important to make distinctions: just because alcohol was purchased does not mean that staff was intoxicated.
Casino Investigations may require different records
Casinos have beverage programs which differ from the standard restaurant service. Drinks are free, there are mobile cocktail servers, gaming-floor supervisors, and extensive security operations provide additional sources of information.
A professional witness from a casino can look over the staffing assignments for beverages along with surveillance footage and security reports as well as employees’ communication methods. Traditional sales receipts could give an inaccurate account if beverages are complimentary.
In these situations the investigation could be based more on surveillance, employees’ observation service records, and other documented procedures. The expert should also be able to identify weaknesses in the evidence, instead of taking an insufficient record as proof of a particular event.
Keep the evidence until it’s no more available
The preservation of documents that are sensitive is a real concern for litigation involving hospitality. Surveillance systems’ records can be retained for a brief duration. Information regarding employee schedules and internal communication and incident documents may be kept by different departments or systems. Attorneys must identify any relevant records earlier and take appropriate steps to safeguard the records.
The extent of the investigation is contingent on the type of accusations. For instance the restaurant might require the records of its dining room and bar. A resort incident might require documentation for an event, travel arrangements, or security communication. A targeted review can identify which documents are necessary without assuming that every department was involved.
Understanding the paperwork is easier when you have operational experience
Preston Rideout is a hospitality veteran with more than 20 years of experience. He has held positions in management, bartending and beverage operations across multiple units. Through Rideout Hospitality Consulting, established in 2010 by Preston Rideout, he has provided advice to hotels, restaurants, and resort operators throughout the United States and internationally.
He has been an expert witness in a variety of cases involving hotels, casinos, resorts and restaurants, for both attorneys representing defense and plaintiffs. The operational background is beneficial in the interpretation of records that appear straightforward to someone who isn’t familiar with hospitality management.
A list of staffing plans is a good example. It lists the people who were given the task of working. Being aware of whether the assignments provide the proper supervision requires understanding of the model of service for the property and operational conditions.
To create a stronger argument Ask more pertinent questions
Early review by experts can help attorneys distinguish documents from unresolved issues. It helps identify documents that are worth requesting and define the terms employed in depositions.
It is not necessary to demonstrate that a written policy was adhered to if there are divergences.
An expert analysis of hospitality is useful in demonstrating the differences using evidence and well-known practices. Understanding the procedure prior to asking employees to answer questions in a hospitality situation can assist lawyers in preparing the case for a an unbiased and trustworthy examination.