HotelChatter asks the question of whether or not you’d want to stay on a women-only floor (for the women among us, of course. Sorry guys.). It’s riffing off this Vancouver Sun article about how more hotels are catering to women, and how they’re doing it.

I don’t think I’d care too much one way or another about the single-gender floor, though I might feel a bit safer if I had to walk the halls late at night. It could be a bit tricky though. The article says that Canada has privacy laws that prohibit the hotel from asking a guest’s gender when s/he makes the reservation, so you might have to guess (apologies in advance to all named Kim, Chris, and other non-denominational monikers). Or maybe you have to request the women’s-only floor? Then you get into transgender issues, etc. I wouldn’t go there unless I had some solid research pointing me toward it.

But more generally, do men and women really want different things from their hotel experience? As the article quotes Penelope Trunk, CEO of the Brazen Careerist, a social network site for Gen Y professionals: “Men want their room to be a something where they dump their stuff; they go out drinking, they come back and watch porn,” says Trunk. “The women want it to be a spa.”

Hmm, not much of a spa-lady here, and I don’t want to buy into the drinking/porn male stereotype. But I do agree with the article’s contention that women eat room service more (note to chefs: please have more than one veggie entree option for we veg-heads who end up eating in more than one night), use the treadmills more than the weight machines, and care more deeply about bathroom lighting and amenities than most guys do. But generally, all I care about is that it’s safe, clean, has lights I can figure out how to turn on, a coffee pot with coffee for the morning, great service, and a comfy bed. The rest is just fluff — nice fluff, for sure, but still fluff.

What do you think?

While outboarding — renting a hotel suite and wooing customers at a trade show without actually supporting the show itself — is nothing new, the recent Consumer Electronics Show’s problems with it have caught the attention of the New York Times In fact IAEE released a statement condemning the practice four years ago.

What does seem to be new, at least to me, is that hotels at CES seemed to be taking the initiative to give the boot to convention crashers. Is that putting too much of a burden on the hotel? I tend to agree with the hospitality lawyer the article quotes and say it is, especially in this economy, a bit much to ask hotels to be the exhibit police, though I applaud those that are willing and able to do it.

I can’t imagine this problem is going to ever go away entirely, but it is interesting to see a major newspaper covering it.

Update: If you ever have doubts about the importance of fact checking, there’s a doozy in the article that someone just pointed out to me: The article says CES drew 1.4 million attendees, down from 1.7 million. Needless to say, those numbers actually refer to the show’s square footage. Oops.

Gotta love Chris Elliott for this one: Hotel fees that must die — and how to kill them. (I’m particularly fond of the “furniture fee.” Hadn’t thought of it in quite those terms before.) Read to the end for the most outrageous fee. I’m just waiting for the flush fee that keeps getting bandied about on some cut-rate airlines. Could that be coming to a hotel near you? These days, I’d say anything is possible.

Thanks to MeCo for the pointer!

Remember last spring when Starwood Hotels accused Hilton of corporate espionage when two ex-Starwood executives Hilton hired allegedly used confidential Starwood information on Hilton’s behalf? The plot just thickened: Starwood: Hilton CEO condoned use of confidential information. This could get ugly. From the article:

n a 135-page document filed in federal court Thursday, Starwood claims [Hilton CEO Christopher] Nassetta and at least 43 other Hilton executives were personally involved in or were aware of and condoned the use of the confidential information that Starwood says was stolen by former executives Ross Klein and Amar Lalvani.

The filing also claims that Steven Goldman, Hilton’s head of global development and a key member of Nassetta’s senior management team, used Lalvani as a “corporate spy” while he was still at Starwood. Goldman personally recruited Lalvani, while Nassetta recruited Klein, the suit claims.

The economy hasn’t been good for most of us, and that includes hotels. Hotels are going into foreclosure at an escalating rate as occupancies and revenues decline. From the article:

And it could get worse next year. An oversupply of guestrooms could keep room rates low, making 2010 a high-risk year for hotel foreclosures. Demand should gain 1.6%, according to hotel research firm STR Global, but average room rates are likely to fall 3.4%. The result would be the greatest spread between demand and rates in the 20 years STR Global has been collecting data.

But what does it all mean for meetings? My colleague Dave Kovaleski did a good job of outlining the issues, including declining service levels and cost-cutting where you may not want it. Do your due diligence, and get some language into your contract that will protect you from any unwanted fallout (read the article for more tips. It’s pretty useful stuff!)

It’s interesting to see the different ways hoteliers and their CVB (sorry, I mean DMO — having a hard time making the switch still) partners are marketing their wares in tight times.

On one end you have Northern Kentucky, which promotes the destination’s lack of glitz and glam with this tagline: “You won’t get the third degree when you choose Northern Kentucky.” On the other end is this Lauderdale Lux promotion of Greater Ft. Lauderdale’s high-end properties. Each is playing to its strengths, and both campaigns are pretty brilliant in their own ways.

(Thanks to Bill Geist’s Zeitgeist, where I found both links in separate posts.)

I’m sure you’ve heard about the case of the poor ESPN reporter who was spied upon and videotaped in the altogether in her hotel room; now hotels are rethinking their guest security practices to hopefully save you and I from this kind of embarrassment. According to Hotel Online:

Joe McInerney, CEO of the American Hotel and Lodging Association, confirmed that his organization “sent an advisory to our members asking them to review all their guest privacy procedures and all of their security procedures to make sure their staff are doing everything they should be doing.”

This includes asking if a guest is OK with someone getting a room adjoining theirs, which is something I’ve never been asked (and never thought too much about until now). They’re also checking into what they can do to stop peepers from peeping. In the meantime, it says to smear vaseline on the peephole, or stick a piece of duct tape over it. Kind of defeats the purpose of the peephole, but whatever.

I’m sure you’ve heard by now about Boston’s Hyatt hotels laying off housekeeping staff and replacing them with cheaper help from a third-party company.

The latest development: Massachusetts governor Deval Patrick is threatening to boycott Hyatt for state business unless the hotels rehire the housekeepers they fired. In a letter to Hyatt CEO Mark Hoplamazian, Patrick called the move “the worst nightmare of every worker in today’s weak economy.”

And now the Harvard Review is using Hyatt’s move as an example of how to damage a brand (from TravelMole):

“Looking for a sure-fire way to do a little damage to your brand? Follow these two simple steps,” wrote the Harvard Review.

2. Outsource their positions to a third-party vendor who will bring in contractors to do their jobs at a lower cost. But — and this is critical — before you fire them, trick your workers into training the people who will replace them. (Note: Hyatt has said this last part isn’t true, while housekeepers say it is.)

It’s not too late to change your mind on this one, Hyatt.

Update: Hyatt now is offering new jobs to those laid off.

Here’s a scary story from the AP: Stadiums, hotels warned to watch for terrorists. From the article:

Counterterrorism officials have issued security bulletins to police around the nation about terrorist interest in attacking stadiums, entertainment complexes and hotels — the latest in a flurry of such internal warnings as investigators chase a possible bomb plot in Denver and New York.

In the two bulletins — sent to police departments Monday and obtained by The Associated Press — officials said they know of no specific plots against such sites, but urged law enforcement and private companies to be vigilant. These two bulletins followed on the heels of a similar warning about the vulnerabilities of mass transit systems.

My question is: Aren’t we already being vigilant? I have no idea exactly what to look for, but I always keep a wary eye out when I’m in a large public space of any kind. Still, while they have no specific targets or dates, I guess it never hurts to remind people that the threat still exists.

And not in a very nice way: A hard ending for housekeepers: Uncommon outsourcing eliminates 100 Hyatt jobs. I’m trying, but I’m just not seeing Hyatt’s side in this one. Especially galling is that they had their housekeeping staff train their replacements while telling them they were just training vacation fill-in staff, not the people who’d be getting their jobs.

I’m not surprised there’s a lot of outrage, boycotts, and bad-mouthing going on as a result of three Boston Hyatt hotels firing their housekeeping staff and replacing them with people from Hospitality Staffing Solutions in Georgia.

Can’t wait to hear the reactions from Boston’s Mayor and Massachusetts’ governor, both of whom I’m sure will have something to say about outsourcing Boston jobs to an out-of-state firm. In the meantime, as Joan Eisenstodt suggests on her blog, write to Hyatt’s Hyatt’s CEO if you want to make your feelings known: Mark Hoplamazian, Hyatt Hotels & Resorts, 71 S. Wacker Dr., 12th FL, Chicago, IL 60606.