he scene is a large ballroom with dinner set up for hundreds. On top of the tables: fine china, crystal, and moodily lit centerpieces. Underneath some tables: wireless devices placed by unknown perpetrators who want to spy on competitors.

Something from a sci-fi plot you say? Not according to veteran planners whose concerns about privacy for meetings in public places are rising with every new technological innovation and higher-stakes business landscape.

“Wireless mikes under the tables may sound like the extreme,” says Joan Eisenstodt, chief strategist for Eisenstodt & Associates, in Washington, D.C., “but if somebody really wants information they could dress up like a server or use technology to get the information they want. There are huge issues around meetings privacy, and every department in a hotel needs to be aware of them.”

WIRELESS MAKES IT EASY
Under-table devices may not be necessary if computer hacks can tap wireless networks for what they want. Anyone working online inside the property may be vulnerable to a snoop’s attack. One solution: Hire a company that specializes in securing a meeting space apart from public spaces.

Concerns about data distribution from F&B operations and all hotel departments abound. Information about housing and events routinely goes to third-party vendors and other hotels within the same brand. However, others may be interested. To wit: In its quest for terrorist suspects, the government has asked airlines about passengers who request kosher meals. Can similar questions of hoteliers be far behind?

Also, can the hotel even acknowledge the presence of a group on property? And who has access to group data, and can they release such information without liability? Also, who has access to attendees while they are conferencing?

Questions about meetings privacy is a rising hot topic in the hospitality and meetings industry. While some say organizational and personal privacy is not possible in the 21st century, others—notably technology, banking, and pharmaceutical firms—attempt to control the environment via booking contract clauses.

Joan Jolley, director of operations and custom events for US Conference Group IDC in Boston, says she is very specific about this phase of negotiations. “I want to know who has access to data we give the hotel,” says Jolley. “For our top clients, I require that the property cannot resell or solicit our attendee information.”

Jolley uses a contract clause requiring that her company’s competitors aren’t on property at the same time her group is in residence.

“The severity of the clause is flexible,” says Jolley. “For top clients and executive events, we don’t allow competing companies to book events anywhere on the property. For more public events like conferences, we allow competitor events onsite so long as (1) the competitor event is small and doesn’t require or allow competing signage in common areas and (2) our space and their space is on another or opposite ends of the property.”

But some hoteliers are fighting attempts at privacy controls. James Goldberg, a Washington, D.C. hospitality attorney, says Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide, Inc. has a clause in its standard contracts which provides (1) the planner or their organization has authority to transfer data and (2) the hotel may share that data with any other third party.

“Fact is, planners for associations I counsel do not have such authority from members,” says Goldberg. “I’ve gone around and around with Starwood about this. Some of their privacy people have told me this provision just got popped into the contract, and they hoped people wouldn’t read it.”

Starwood’s senior vice president of industry relations, David Scypinski, defends his company’s rights to information planners turn over to them. Pushback from buyers recently prompted a rewrite of the boilerplate contract.

“We now say anything you give us for purposes of conducting a meeting had better be free and clear. When you give it to us, you indemnify us. You don’t have to give us anything ahead of the event except the information that Joe Smith is checking in one day and leaving the next. What we get from the group is protected and we do put a common sense filter on it. We don’t sell it and we don’t give it to porn sites. But we do move it around internally to order food or maybe give it to a tour company that’s working for the group. When Smith checks in, however, information he gives us is ours to do with what we want to do with it. He is the end user. We use his data internally for such things as promotion of loyalty and vacation programs, and Joe can opt out of those if he wants.

“In the old days, nobody gave a rip that we were giving out info,” Scypinski continues. “Now we have misperceptions and phobia about it.”

Ruth A. Hill is a frequent contributor to Hotel F&B EXECUTIVE.