PARIS, Jakarta, Istanbul – terror is no longer limited to cities like Kabul or Aleppo. Environmental events such as floods, earthquakes or volcanic eruptions are also part of daily risks. These can happen anywhere, 24/7/365. While individuals are primarily responsible for their own safety, companies have a fiduciary responsibility, especially towards corporate travellers, who are exposed to constantly changing risks.
In emergencies, TMC data is used to determine what travellers are in risk areas, however, this only provides departure/arrival airport. Direct bookings and use of OTA’s exacerbate this problem and fragment data even more.
Looking at Brussels for example: Were travellers at the airport or the downtown subway station during the attacks? Did they use public transport? Were they even in Brussels or outside the city? Can travellers be contacted to verify they’re safe? Can emergency information be sent instantaneously? Can travellers advise of emergencies, seek help or allow for notification to others?
Current data sources are woefully inadequate, however, there are new, reliable and supplier-neutral options – traveller/geo-tracking. These systems centre around the ability to locate travellers based on their mobile phone signal. With the full knowledge and consent of the traveller, an app is installed that can then transmit its location. This not only provides the true location of the traveller but allows to warn them of dangers in their vicinity, organise assistance or obtain live, on-the-ground information. This technology can revolutionise traveller safety and security.
But it also raises questions on rights to privacy and data privacy.
Geo-tracking is the most efficient method to determine the true location of travellers and solve the issue of fragmented data. Obviously these systems are not free-of-charge and putting together a business case can be tricky. The ROI is difficult to determine as, if the system is used properly and efficiently, there will be no “savings” or “return on investment” as such.
Duty of care and safety and security are not topics that can be won with a cost argument, however, the potential price tag of only one incident, one injured employee, one death, one abduction can exceed any system cost by far.
Legally, collecting personal data through geo-tracking falls under the heading of individuals’ right to privacy and data privacy, and is subject to the relevant national laws. In the past geo-tracking had a bad reputation as companies frequently used it to monitor employees and (ab)use the data to make conclusions on employee behaviour, efficiency, etc. This has caused many governments to limit or even prohibit the use of geo-tracking by corporations. However, the beneficial, non “big brother” use of this technology in the field of traveller safety and security is too new to be clearly defined by law.
An exact set of rules that companies can use worldwide does not exist. Generally the location of the traveller’s employment contract determines which national law applies. All this appears to be truly challenging, however, a detailed analysis of the different rules and regulation does allow us to draft an overarching set of rules.
- Explain employees the advantages of emergency apps and geo-tracking, who will have access to the data and under what circumstances and when data is erased
- Advise that use is voluntary and that employee can decline and/or withdraw consent at any time and without reason
- No consequences or travel ban if employee declines
- Explicitly consent in writing to track – not as part of employment contract or travel-policy
- Never limited use to just one group of travellers e.g. management
- Allow traveller to disable the software, however, advise of risks in doing so
- Irretrievably delete all date once trip is completed
Limiting the tracking feature through a privacy mode is an effective alternative if the use of full-time/permanent tracking is not a suitable option.
This feature was recently introduced by Vismo, a UK global tracking solutions provider. In an emergency, the traveller can turn off the privacy mode and the exact geo-location is immediately transmitted to the company. Additionally, in the event of a crisis the privacy mode can be switched off remotely by the system administrator and the traveller is notified.
Geo-tracking can be the panacea for the safety and security concerns of our business travellers and solve many of the problems that have limited duty of care. Granted, not every employee may consent to take part in the programme and implementation may be time consuming. On the other hand, the ever increasing security threats around the world require an all encompassing duty of care programme that does not rely of fragmented booking information alone.
By Andreas J G Wellauer
***
Andreas J G Wellauer is a leading expert, author and speaker on corporate travel management. His global background includes working for UBS Hong Kong, ADB Manila, Woolworth Australia and the UN in New York. Wellauer is CEO of German based GALIANT Consulting, a company focusing on strategic, innovative and emerging travel-trend consulting.
In the wild, such as the high mountains of Switzerland where I was on vacation last month, marmots whistle when they sense danger. These cute large squirrels are a source of food for eagles, and even humans. Nature, as we know, is a survival of the fittest, so I have no argument with natural food chains. But I have a problem when humans make the natural unnatural, and how we have seen that happen in big and small ways.
