Sexual Harassment in Today’s Hotel Business: The Laws Changed, But Has the Culture?

The Laws Have Changed. The Policies Have Changed. But People Still Do Stupid Things.

The hotel business has changed enormously since the 1970s. Employment laws are stronger. Human resources departments are more sophisticated. Companies have written sexual-harassment policies, reporting procedures, investigation processes, and, in many organizations, zero-tolerance policies.

On paper, the hospitality industry today is very different from the industry I remember decades ago.

But there is one uncomfortable question that hotel companies should continue asking:

Have people and workplace behavior changed as much as the policies have?

My answer, based on many years around the hotel business, is that the answer is not always yes.

People still do stupid things.

Sometimes they do them because they believe their position protects them. Sometimes they think they are simply being friendly or funny. Sometimes they have become so accustomed to a particular hotel culture that they no longer recognize where professional behavior ends and inappropriate behavior begins. And sometimes people simply believe that because they have gotten away with something for years, they can continue doing it.

That is where the real problem begins.

Looking Back at the 1970s

I remember the hotel business in the 1970s.

At that time, the culture was very different. I personally witnessed situations in which corporate officers and general managers appeared to pursue female employees. There were situations involving flirting, unwanted attention, inappropriate comments, and behavior that today would immediately raise serious concerns.

The problem was not only the behavior itself. It was the power structure.

A general manager could influence an employee's schedule, hours, promotion, evaluation, working conditions, and future opportunities. A corporate executive could have even greater influence.

For a young employee, saying "no" to someone with that kind of authority was not necessarily simple.

And complaining could be frightening.

Would the employee be believed? Would management protect the employee? Would she lose her job? Would her hours be reduced? Would other managers treat her differently?

In many workplaces during that era, employees did not have the same awareness, legal protections, reporting mechanisms, or organizational support that employees have today.

That does not mean every hotel in the 1970s operated this way. It means the industry had a culture in which behavior that should have been challenged was sometimes tolerated, ignored, or treated as normal.

Today We Have Zero-Tolerance Policies

Today, major hotel companies recognize that sexual harassment is unacceptable.

Employees receive policies explaining prohibited conduct. Companies establish reporting procedures. Human resources departments investigate complaints. Managers are expected to maintain professional relationships with employees.

The phrase "zero tolerance" is common throughout corporate America, including hospitality.

But a policy is only as effective as the people who enforce it.

A hotel can have a beautiful employee handbook sitting on a shelf and still have a workplace where employees are uncomfortable reporting inappropriate behavior.

A company can require annual online training and still have a manager who does not understand how his behavior affects employees.

A hotel can tell employees, "If you see something, say something," while employees quietly wonder what will happen if the person they need to report is the general manager, regional vice president, or another senior executive.

That is the difference between having a policy and having a culture.

People Still Do Stupid Things

The reality is that laws cannot change human behavior by themselves.

A person can know that sexual harassment is prohibited and still make an inappropriate comment.

A manager can complete a required training course and still make an employee uncomfortable.

An executive can understand the company's policy and still cross a personal boundary.

A supervisor can hear a complaint and decide that the employee is "overreacting."

A hotel can have zero tolerance written into its policies while individual people continue making bad decisions.

This is why hotel companies should not measure success simply by asking: "Did everyone complete the training?"

The better question is: "Does everyone understand what professional behavior actually looks like, and do they believe management will act when something goes wrong?

The Training Problem in Hospitality

One of the areas that deserves much more attention is sexual-harassment training.

Hotel employees are trained on countless operational subjects. They learn how to operate the property-management system, brand standards, food safety, fire and life-safety procedures, guest-service standards, cash handling, room cleaning, and emergency procedures.

But sexual-harassment training can sometimes become a check-the-box exercise.

An employee sits at a computer, watches a presentation, answers a few questions, receives a completion certificate, and goes back to work.

That may satisfy a corporate requirement.

But it does not necessarily change behavior.

Hospitality needs training that reflects the realities of hospitality.

A housekeeper needs to know what to do when a guest exposes himself or makes unwanted sexual comments.

A front-desk employee needs to know what to do when a guest makes repeated personal or sexual advances.

A restaurant employee needs to know how to respond when a customer touches her.

A supervisor needs to understand what constitutes inappropriate behavior toward employees.

A general manager needs to understand that his position does not give him permission to invade an employee's personal space.

And executives need to understand that being senior does not make them exempt from professional boundaries.

The Hotel Guest Creates Another Complication

Hotels have another problem that many other businesses do not face to the same degree: employees interact with guests in very personal environments.

Housekeepers enter guest rooms. Servers interact with guests over meals and drinks. Front-desk employees frequently deal with guests one-on-one. Valet attendants handle personal property.

Employees can encounter guests who believe that paying for a hotel room, meal, or drink gives them permission to behave however they want.

It does not.

A guest's status as a customer does not eliminate an employee's right to professional respect and personal boundaries.

Hotel companies need to make this clear to both employees and managers.

A Recent Experience Made Me Think About This Again

A couple of weeks ago, I was interviewing for a position.

During the interview process, the vice president of operations was giving me a tour of the property.

We stopped at one of the outlets, where several older women were having breakfast. During the tour, I saw the VP approach one of the tables, take a guest's hand, and kiss her on the head. I remember thinking that doesn't feel right to me. I was uncomfortable seeing it.

I do not know the relationship between the VP and the guest. I do not know whether the guest welcomed the gesture. I do not know the circumstances surrounding it, and therefore I would not characterize the incident as sexual harassment based solely on what I observed.

But it raised an important professional question for me:

Why would a senior executive assume that physical contact with a guest is appropriate?

Hospitality is about making people feel welcome. It is not about assuming that physical familiarity is always welcome.

Perhaps the guest knew the VP personally. Perhaps she was completely comfortable with the interaction. There may be an explanation that I do not know.

Nevertheless, from the perspective of someone interviewing for a leadership position and watching the interaction, it made me uncomfortable.

And that is precisely why professional boundaries matter.

Intent Is Not the Only Issue

One of the biggest lessons hotel leaders need to understand is that intent and impact are not always the same thing.

A manager may say: "I was only joking."

An executive may say: "I was only being friendly."

A supervisor may say: "She knows I didn't mean anything by it."

But the person on the receiving end may feel uncomfortable, intimidated, embarrassed, or pressured.

That does not automatically mean the conduct is legally sexual harassment.

However, it should encourage leaders to think carefully about their behavior.

The safest professional standard is not: "Can I get away with this?"

The better standard is: "Would a reasonable employee, guest, or observer see this as professional behavior?

Leadership Has to Set the Example

Hotel culture starts at the top.

If a general manager treats employees respectfully, department heads are more likely to follow.

If a vice president takes professional boundaries seriously, general managers notice.

If corporate leadership investigates complaints regardless of who is involved, employees learn that the policy has meaning.

But the opposite is also true.

If employees see executives making inappropriate jokes, touching people casually, flirting with employees, or ignoring complaints, they receive a very different message.

The message becomes: The rules apply to everyone except the people who have power.

That is extremely dangerous for a hotel company.

What Effective Training Should Look Like

Sexual harassment training in hotels should not be limited to an annual computer course.

Training should be practical, repeated, and specific to hotel operations.

It should include real-world situations such as:

• A guest making sexual comments to a housekeeper.

• A guest exposing himself when an employee enters a room.

• A supervisor repeatedly commenting on an employee's appearance.

• A manager asking an employee out after the employee has already declined.

• An executive becoming overly familiar with a guest.

• An employee reporting inappropriate behavior by a high-ranking manager.

• A supervisor witnessing inappropriate behavior and failing to report it.

• A manager retaliating against an employee who makes a complaint.

• Employees being afraid to report a problem because the accused person is considered "important" to the hotel.

Training should also explain what employees should do immediately when something happens.

Who do they call? Who receives the complaint? What information should be documented? What happens after the complaint? How is confidentiality handled? What protection exists against retaliation?

Employees should not have to figure out the answers after something goes wrong.

Training Managers Is Especially Important

One of the most important groups to train is management.

A frontline employee may make a mistake because he or she does not understand the policy.

A manager's mistake can have much greater consequences.

Managers control schedules, assignments, evaluations, discipline, promotions, and sometimes continued employment.

They therefore need to understand that even apparently casual behavior can create an uncomfortable power dynamic.

Management training should include a simple principle:

If you have authority over someone's job, be extremely careful about personal relationships, comments, physical contact, and anything that could reasonably make an employee feel pressured.

What Happens When the Accused Person Is Powerful?

This is where a hotel's culture is truly tested.

It is relatively easy to enforce a policy when the accused employee is a new housekeeper or entry-level employee.

The real test comes when the allegation involves a general manager, regional executive, vice president, corporate officer, high-producing manager, or important client or guest.

The investigation should not depend on how valuable the person is to the organization.

The standard should be the same.

That does not mean automatically believing every allegation or automatically finding someone guilty.

It means taking every complaint seriously, investigating fairly, documenting the process, protecting against retaliation, and making decisions based on evidence and established policy.

Real Hotel Industry Cases

The problem is not theoretical.

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has brought cases involving alleged sexual harassment in hotels.

In 2025, the EEOC announced a lawsuit involving Paia Inn, a hotel on Maui. The agency alleged that the hotel's owner sexually harassed young female employees, including some teenagers, and retaliated against employees who complained. These are allegations made in litigation and should not be treated as established facts simply because a lawsuit was filed.

In 2022, the EEOC announced a $370,000 settlement involving hotel operators of a Hawthorn Suites by Wyndham near Seattle-Tacoma International Airport. The agency alleged that a maintenance/housekeeping manager sexually harassed two female housekeepers and that the owners failed to conduct a thorough investigation after a complaint. The settlement included monetary relief and other measures.

In 2020, the EEOC announced a $45,000 settlement involving a DoubleTree hotel in Jefferson City, Missouri. The agency alleged that a male room inspector made offensive sexual comments and engaged in unwanted physical conduct toward a female housekeeper, while management and an owner allegedly knew about the conduct and failed to take appropriate action.

These cases demonstrate an important point:

Having a policy is not enough. A company must respond appropriately when the policy is allegedly violated.

The Cost Is Greater Than a Lawsuit

The financial cost of harassment can be substantial.

But the damage to a hotel can go far beyond a settlement.

Employees leave.

Good managers become frustrated.

Recruitment becomes more difficult.

Trust disappears.

People stop reporting problems.

Guest service can suffer.

The hotel's reputation can suffer.

And employees may begin to believe that management cares more about protecting management than protecting employees.

Once that culture develops, changing it can be extremely difficult.

We Should Not Romanticize the Old Hotel Business

Sometimes people who have been in hospitality for many years say: "Things were different back then."

They were.

But different does not necessarily mean better.

The hotel business in the 1970s had many great people and many great leaders. It also had practices and attitudes that would not be acceptable today.

The answer is not to return to the past.

The answer is to take the best parts of hospitality from that era personal service, relationships, pride in the property, knowing your guests, and taking care of your employees and combine them with modern standards of professionalism, equality, accountability, and respect.

Zero Tolerance Must Mean Something

“Zero tolerance” should not be a slogan.

It should mean that an employee can make a complaint without fear.

It should mean that a manager understands his or her responsibility.

It should mean that executives are held to professional standards.

It should mean that guests who behave inappropriately are addressed appropriately.

It should mean that investigations are taken seriously.

It should mean that retaliation is not tolerated.

And it should mean that training is more than clicking through a computer program once a year.

The Bottom Line

The hotel industry has come a long way since the 1970s.

The laws are stronger. The policies are clearer. Employees are more aware of their rights. Companies have more formal systems for reporting and investigating complaints.

But none of those things can eliminate bad judgment.

People still do stupid things.

They still cross boundaries.

They still sometimes confuse friendliness with familiarity.

And sometimes people in positions of authority forget that their position carries additional responsibility.

That is why hotel companies must continue investing in meaningful sexual-harassment training, especially for managers and executives.

The goal should not simply be to prevent a lawsuit.

The goal should be to create a workplace where employees and guests are treated with dignity and respect because that is what professional hospitality is supposed to mean.

After many years in the hotel business, I believe the most important question is not whether a hotel has a sexual-harassment policy.

Almost every major organization has one.

The important question is:

When something inappropriate happens, does everyone from the newest employee to the most senior executive know that the same professional standards apply?

That is where the real test of a hotel's culture begins.

Source Notes

1. U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). “EEOC Sues Paia Inn for Sexual Harassment and Retaliation.” May 15, 2025. The EEOC described allegations involving sexual harassment of young female hotel employees and retaliation against complainants. The allegations should be distinguished from facts established at trial. https://www.eeoc.gov/newsroom/eeoc-sues-paia-inn-sexual-harassment-and-retaliation

2. U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). “Hotel Owners to Pay $370,000 to Settle EEOC Sexual Harassment Lawsuit.” June 29, 2022. The agency reported a settlement involving allegations of harassment of two female housekeepers at a hotel near Seattle-Tacoma International Airport and alleged failures to investigate adequately. https://www.eeoc.gov/newsroom/hotel-owners-pay-370000-settle-eeoc-sexual-harassment-lawsuit

3. U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). “Doubletree Hotel to Pay $45,000 and Change Policies and Procedures to Settle Sexual Harassment Lawsuit.” August 5, 2020. The EEOC reported a settlement involving allegations of sexual comments and unwanted physical contact by a room inspector toward a female housekeeper. https://www.eeoc.gov/newsroom/doubletree-hotel-pay-45000-and-change-policies-and-procedures-settle-sexual-harassment

4. U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and EEOC enforcement materials concerning sexual harassment, discrimination, retaliation, and employer responsibilities. https://www.eeoc.gov/

5. U.S. Department of Labor. Workplace harassment and related federal employment guidance. https://www.dol.gov/