
Jim Butler has a guest post by Marty Orlick up over at
Hotel Law Blog that raises some interesting questions. I highly recommend that you head over there to read the whole article.
Marty addresses the issues raised in a particular case
A paralyzed guest filed a federal lawsuit against an Akron, Ohio hotel after he was "banned" for accidentally soiling his linens because his colostomy bag failed while he was asleep. Though he paid for the linens and left the maid a hefty tip, he was told by a night desk clerk that he was "banned for life" by the hotel manager when he attempted to stay at the hotel again. He is now suing the hotel under the Americans with Disabilities Act for discrimination against the disabled.
I have to admit that I was a bit surprised by this comment by Marty. He says hotel employees have:
not been generally trained to handle human waste, but the situation also presents hazardous public health issues for staff and other guests.
Say what?
I don't know about you, but when I'm managing an inn, my staff are most definitely trained to handle waste. It's an ugly aspect of the industry but it's reality all the same.
Housekeepers should not only wear gloves, they should know that blood and other body fluids are potential biological hazards, and understand their responsibilities in protecting themselves as well as future guests from contamination.
Since the innkeepers are often doing the laundry in small inns, their understanding of the potential hazard is imperative.
So how much compliance is necessary and how much is overboard?
I can't tell you how many small inns I know who agreed to settlements regarding ADA compliance for issues that, because of their size, they were not required to comply with at all.
Were they following bad legal advice? Maybe. Or perhaps making a business decision as to whether going to court was a worthwhile endeavor as opposed to settling the issue once and for all.
As for banned guest lists, one would hope that most innkeepers would not ban a disabled guest for a one-time accident that was both embarrassing and paid for.
I agree with Marty that the best way to ensure compliance is to speak to an attorney. I think all small inns would be wise to know their responsibilities.
But I also think that all of us would be wise to remember that accidents happen and that banning a guest should be a last resort for a disruptive guest, not a means to exclude disabled guests.
It is simply good business to ensure all staff are well-trained to handle everyday hazards as well as the unexpected emergency. One thing we know for sure about guests: accidents happen. Good innkeepers are prepared for that reality.
There's a reason we are called the hospitality industry and it's not about making it easy for us. It's about ensuring a positive guest experience for all guests, regardless of disability.
That said, the article does indeed raise some interesting points. As Marty says,
It is important to remember that hotels are not hospitals or nursing homes. Hotels have a responsibility to individuals with disabilities to ensure that they receive the privileges that the facilities offer as fully as possible, but not when the need fundamentally alters the nature of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations being offered or places an undue burden on hotel staff.
Agreed. But we're talking an accident here, folks, not a request for personal assistance. Very, very big difference, in my humble opinion.
Like I said, go on over and
read the whole thing.
And if you don't know whether your inn is compliant with all the laws applicable in your state, this would be a good time to find out.
On that particular aspect, I wholeheartedly agree with both Marty and Jim. When in doubt, get legal advice.