Introduction:
Of the illicit industries, human trafficking is an indescribably evil, large, and hidden leviathan. As a $150 billion dollar industry, human trafficking is estimated to involve over 45.8 million victims worldwide as of 2018. Human Trafficking is defined by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime as “the recruitment, transportation, transfer, harbouring or receipt of people through force, fraud or deception, with the aim of exploiting them for profit.” Categorized by the use of “force, fraud, or coercion,” human trafficking is a crime against humanity which forces people into labor, forced and violent organ removal, and nonconsensual sex.
A tragic form of trafficking we see is sex trafficking, which affects an estimated 24.9 million victims worldwide. People are trafficked, among many locales, through brothels, massage parlors, and unexpectedly, hotels. As an illicit industry, human trafficking is very difficult to trace. However, there are several points where trafficking is more likely to surface and intersect with our daily lives, though it remains somewhat unrecognizable. However, steps are being taken, especially in the most monitorable and corporate locales where trafficking resides, to recognize and intervene in trafficking cases. Hotels, generally owned by large corporations, from the low-end to high-end, are taking steps to understand how trafficking affects them, and to train their staff on how to recognize and report possible cases. Through implementation of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act in the United States, it has become easier for survivors to seek justice against their traffickers, as well as corporations such as hotels that might have been a part of their time being trafficked. Since 2020, a number of lawsuits have been filed against hotels in which survivors had been trafficked. These lawsuits provide more accountability for hotels in the United States, and have provided public criticism of hotels, which can help to inform hotels of how to better address trafficking as it approaches their properties. By examining case studies of mid-price hotels from lawsuits and stories following the TVPRA Act, I will help to answer the question of, within the system of trafficking in the United states, where hotels and hotel staff can best recognize and intercept sex-trafficking outfits occurring in their hotels. In this article I will conclude that a number of interception points were missed, (and some were not), and that with changes in the hotel industry since the pandemic, we must modernize and continuously update our understanding of where the interception points might be.
Theoretical Context and Research Methods:
In approaching human trafficking, it is important to keep in mind the theoretical framework of understanding the issue, and for this subject I will be employing the systems approach. According to Kondrat in 2013, “In relation to human trafficking and human rights, both general systems theory and Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory are often already present and applied when thinking about interventions, even if not explicitly.” The systems approach fits well as this worldwide crime is broken into many parts throughout the world which all affect each other and intersect with many industries. This system is well-described and well-understood by the NGO, The Polaris Project. Within the systematic change matrix for approaching human trafficking, detailed by the Polaris Project, eight systems of mainstream industries are identified which may either “enable or intersect” with potential traffickers or victims. These systems were identified as each having particular intersections with trafficking which can be handled, with similar and different possible points of intersection with traffickers. Among these systems are listed: the financial services industries, transportation, housing and homelessness, health care, social media, and business regulatory systems, and Hotels and Motels.
While each of these systems demands their own specific focus, I will be engaging with the hotel and motel system in this report. The Polaris Project reports that, “[s]ince the beginning of the National Human Trafficking Hotline in December 2007 through December 31, 2017, the Hotline has recorded 3,596 cases of human trafficking involving a hotel or motel. Furthermore, 75 percent of survivors in the Polaris survey reported coming into contact with hotels at some point during their trafficking situation.” In their report on trafficking and the hotel industry, The Polaris Project highlighted the Hotels and Motels being widely used in recruitment of potential victims, for escort services. Trafficking outfits employ the use of all levels of hotels and motels, with variation from the specific examples of recruitment process at nicer hotels and escort services at all levels. While Polaris indicates Hotels also having intersection with traveling sales crews and other labor trafficking, I will be focusing on sex trafficking in this report. Sex trafficking and in-call out-call escort services are identified as major intersections between the hotel industry and human trafficking. The Polaris Project highlights several ways that hotels may combat trafficking with respect to these regions. In addition to understanding how trafficking intersects with different industries, it is important to know how it can be intercepted within each industry. The Ecole Hoteliere Lausanne (EHL), in their article on combating human trafficking within the hotel industry, describes the need for hotels to identify and engage in “critical intervention points” (CIPs), as potential places for hotels and their staff to intervene with traffickers and trafficking victims where they intersect with hotels. In this article I hope to link the understanding of intersections between traffickers, their victims, and hotels, presented by The Polaris Project, with the approach highlighted by Ecole Hoteliere Lausanne (EHL) of finding Critical Intervention Points. In this article, I will be examining four brief case studies, highlighting our own possible critical intervention points, and identifying a few potential threats to these posed intervention points, some of which are the same highlighted by EHL, which have arisen with the changes to the hospitality industry since the Covid-19 pandemic. As hotel technology keeps changing and advancing, especially post-pandemic, it is very important that we recognize where we need to adapt and change our approaches to fighting sex trafficking within the hotel industry.
Case 1: L.H. vs. Marriott Int’l Inc.
Background: After being trafficked for over a decade, starting at the age of 15, L.H. sued several companies which she believed benefitted from the trafficking she was a victim to. These companies includued Mariott International, as well as Hilton Worldwide Holdings, G6 Hospitality LLC, and Craigslist. During her decade of being a victim, she was moved from hotel to hotel to meet “johns,” the common term for customers of sex trafficking. In this time she was brutalized by her traffickers in these hotels. She argued that the hotel front desk agents at the Miami hotels personally knew the sex traffickers, and that they were paid off to conceal the operation. While in the Hilton Embassy Suites in Miami, she alleged that a housekeeper walked into the room while she was being trafficked, and would have seen a number of the paraphernalia and drugs, and other obvious signs of trafficking, but she made eye contact with L.H. and left, without going to anyone for help. She argued that the hotel should have seen that she was malnourished, not allowed to speak at the front desk of the hotel, “bruised, covered in burn marks from cigarettes, drugged, and inappropriately attired.” These are all common signs now indicated for human trafficking within hotel trainings. In addition to L.H. and the other victims not being able to speak at the front desk, there was also an “obvious parade of sex buyers” in and out of the hotels in which she was trafficked. She argued that the signs of: 1) refusal of room service 2) silence at the front desk 3) physical injuries and inappropriate dress 4) string of “johns” entering the building, and other things, were obvious signs in which the Hotels could have stepped in. L.H.’s case was dismissed.
Critical Intervention Points: The intervention points here are most clearly house-keeping, management of the front desk agents and the H.R. of the hotel for allowing front desk agents who were complicit in the crimes, the front desk agents who were oblivious to, or otherwise did nothing in response to the signs of trafficking.
Case 2: A.R. v. Wyndham Hotels & Resorts, Inc.
Background: A.R. (Ricchio) was trafficked from 2009 to 2015, and sued Wyndham Corporations for being complicit in and profiting from sex trafficking which she was a victim to, under the TVPRA. It is important to note that for a hotel to be determined to be a part of a venture under the TVPRA act “does not require an ‘overt act.’” She claimed the trafficking took place at a Super 8 and Hawthorn Suites near Columbus, Ohio. She argued that the hotel staff should have recognized the situation by “1) the number of male guests asking for [her] at the front desk; (2) constant foot traffic to [her] room by ‘johns’…” (3) that one of her traffickers asked that the front desk alert him if she tried to leave the hotels, “(4) excessive requests for towels and linens…” (5) paraphernalia and an unusually large amount of sexually-related garbage, disposed of in garbage bins, (6) cash payment at the front desk, and (7) illegal drug use. Any one of these could have been identified by either the front desk, security, or any number of staff members who would pass her room and see the foot traffic, and housekeeping, who had access to the rooms and the garbage. Ricchio also called the front desk for help in a physical altercation, and while someone was sent to break up the fight, she ended up being returned to her room by the trafficker, “without staff interference.”
Critical Points of Intervention: The main points of intervention would be largely the front desk agents, housekeeping, and on a smaller part the rest of the hotel staff.
Case 3: The Baldwin Hotel
This is not a case study from a legal case, however I will be highlighting points of a case study of a successful intervention from human trafficking at a hotel in New York City, The Baldwin Hotel. The intervention was by a young front-desk agent, Christine, who recognized some of the signs of human trafficking, and was able to intervene and contact local police for help. She recognized a man in the lobby, who received many young girls who were dressed inappropriately. The girls did not make eye contact with her or the front desk, and were never alone. She became suspicious, and communicated her concerns with a coworker in housekeeping, who also acknowledged that something was wrong, as the “Do Not Disturb” sign had been on the doors. After going to other coworkers, the hotel staff found that the man went by the name “John Perez,” and had checked into several rooms under his name, using a mobile key.
Since mobile keys were used, Christine, the front desk agent, was not encountered by John Perez at first, and she worried he might have been frustrated that she had recognized him as he had checked in with a mobile key. One can also assume that had the mobile check-in not been used, the front desk agents would have been able to speak to “Perez” at his check-in, and see that he had booked several rooms under his name, a possible red flag. The bellman and bartenders also agreed with her that something was wrong. Christine reached out to management, who contacted the police to intervene. If it had not been for Christine being on the lookout and so alert to the signs, especially with the lack of encountering him at first check in, the police would not have been contacted and nothing would have been done.
Critical Points of Intervention: Front desk agents, primarily, as well as housekeeping staff, bartenders, and bellmen. Effective communication on the signs and issues was employed by members of the staff from many different departments.
Conclusion:
Most critical intervention points are the front desk, and housekeeping, as well as H.R. on the hiring of staff, and general hotel staff including bartenders and bellmen.
With the front desk and housekeeping being the main points of intervention, however, there are changes in how these two departments interact with the guests. For one, contactless check-in reduces the contact between hotel staff and potential traffickers and victims, as well as “johns.” In addition, housekeeping is often done by request, which would limit the number of interactions between staff and possible victims much more than in L.H.’s case and A.R.’s. It will be important for future research to analyze what should be done to understand new means of intervention since these changes have been implemented, and if these changes should remain in place.