An incident report for an establishment could be only one or two paragraphs. The report identifies the guest as the source of the incident, describes the incident and identifies the staff who responded and details the time management was notified.
For an attorney, that report can cause more questions than it addresses. Who was the person in charge of the employees in this case? Was surveillance footage preserved? Did the facility follow its rules? Was the property involved in earlier interactions not included in the report.
These questions illustrate the reasons why it is sometimes necessary to examine business records before witness testimony in a lawsuit regarding hospitality.
Start by looking through the documents that were produced during normal operation
Businesses in the hospitality industry keep records of guest service, scheduling guest service as well as security, training and management. These records weren’t necessarily created for court proceedings, but they can be used to determine how the facility operated during an incident.
A professional witness in hospitality could review the staffing schedules and operating procedures as well as employee training files or logs of security and surveillance camera recordings to determine what responsibilities are assigned to each person. For example, a written policy might require a manager to respond to an employee who reports an drunken guest.
Investigating the incident should determine whether the manager was working on the incident, if the complaint was issued, and based on the evidence, what was the response. It is much more important to look at actual actions than to assume that written directives were followed or not observed.
Restaurant records require their own Interpretation
Restaurant investigations can be challenging as employees have to divide their time between the preparation of beverages, food service, customer requests, and managing the dining area. A restaurant expert witness can explain how these responsibilities affect the decisions employees make during service.
Imagine a scenario where a client ordered alcohol at the bar, and later moved to tables. The bar receipt might document the initial purchase, whereas the dining room transaction records may document subsequent orders.
However, the records may not be able to determine what the table server was aware of about the earlier service. Examining server assignments, transaction times, management notes, and employee statements together can aid in understanding the sequence. The key difference is: evidence that alcohol was purchased is not automatically evidence that the staff member was intoxicated.
Casino Investigations might require other records
Casino beverage plans can be significantly different from those offered by a typical restaurant. Drinks are free, there are mobile cocktail servers, gaming-floor supervisors, and extensive security operations create further sources of information.
An expert witness at a casino can look over the staffing assignments for beverages and surveillance footage including security reports, employee communications procedures. When beverages are provided as a complimentary benefit, traditional sales receipts can be not complete.
In these situations, the investigation could rely more on surveillance, employee observation service records, and other documented procedures. The expert also needs to recognize weaknesses in the evidence, instead of taking an insufficient record as proof of an incident.
Save the evidence before it is no longer available
One practical concern when it comes to hospitality litigation is the protection of time sensitive records. Certain surveillance systems only preserve the records for a set amount of time. Employee schedules, internal communications, and incident records may be kept in various departments or in different systems. Attorneys need to identify and archive the records that may be pertinent as soon as they can.
The scope of the necessary investigation is contingent upon the allegations. The extent of the investigation will be contingent on the allegations. A specific review can help determine the records that are pertinent without taking for granted that every department played an important function.
The Paperwork is a Product of Operational Experience
Preston Rideout is a hospitality veteran with more than 20 years of experience. He has held various positions in bartending, management and beverages operations in a variety of divisions. Through Rideout Hospitality Consulting, established in 2010 by Preston Rideout, he has provided advice to the hotel, restaurant and resort owners in the United States and internationally.
He has served as an expert witness in cases involving hotels, casinos, resorts as well as restaurants for plaintiffs’ and defense counsel. This background in operations can be helpful in understanding records that could seem easy to a person who isn’t familiar with hospitality management.
Staffing schedules, for example determine who was given the task. To determine whether the assignments were appropriate you must know the model of service for the facility and its operational conditions.
Clearness in your questions is the initial step to stronger arguments
An early expert review will aid attorneys in distinguishing between evidence-based facts and questions that remain unanswered. It can help identify other records worth requesting, clarify what the legal terminology is for depositions and determine which employee actions require more scrutiny.
The reason for discrepancies is not always because of a failure in operation. Not every policy that shows the proper procedure was adhered to.
It is important to have an expert’s analysis that demonstrates these distinctions using established industry practices and relevant evidence. Understanding the procedure prior to questioning employees in a hospitality matter can help lawyers prepare a case with a an unbiased and trustworthy examination.