As the federal government continues to expand its own power to demand data on travelers, meeting planners are trying to steer clear of any trouble that could arise from disclosing attendee information.
Meetings often entail the aggregation of data including attendee lists, credit card information, travel histories, and housing lists. Experts say it's possible that the government could ask for that information under the auspices of ongoing antiterrorism efforts. "We're all watching the situation closely," says Steve Goodman, vice president of Cleveland, OH-based Conferon. "Things like divulging confidential information about travelers is of utmost concern" to both corporations and associations, he explains.
As previously reported in Successful Meetings, subpoenas and national security letters were used last December by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to obtain guest lists at Las Vegas hotels as part of security precautions for New Year's Eve. So far fallout from the action has not included any litigation, but two of the nation's biggest air carriers, Northwest Airlines and JetBlue Airways, are already facing class-action suits over sharing data on millions of passengers with the federal government for a secret airport security project in September of 2003.
The FBI's authority to demand records from businesses in terrorism cases was boosted when the president signed the 2004 authorization bill for intelligence agencies in December. Financial institutions such as banks were previously subject to such demands, but the new measure was expanded to include travel agencies and other businesses, possibly including meetings management outfits.
To avert backlash from clients, some businesses have refused to provide customer information for terrorism investigations unless they are first given subpoenas or national security letters. In such cases, "Complying with a government requirement will probably not expose you to liability," says John Foster, an Atlanta-based attorney.
"We've not been asked by the Department of Homeland Security to show our lists, but we think it is a possibility," says Goodman. "Our position is we would only do that if we were first given permission from clients."
Foster says that "in order to cut off any legal action it probably wouldn't be a bad idea" to indemnify yourself, in writing, from having to turn over attendee information to the authorities.
Meanwhile, the centerpiece of the federal government's post-9/11 air travel security efforts, the second-generation, Computer-Assisted Passenger Prescreening System (CAPPS II), continues to face criticism and delays over budget, technology, and privacy issues. Under CAPPS II, airlines would ask passengers for an expanded amount of reservation information, including date of birth, home address, and home telephone number. Using that information, CAPPS II would verify the identity of the passenger and conduct a risk assessment, thereby determining if secondary screening would follow.