Quite possibly the unofficial theme of this year’s ITM 2008 Conference in Dublin - the official line was ‘evolution’ - has been the tricky issue of just what duty of care employers have to employees.

 
The recent Corporate Manslaughter Act (CMA) has honed company response to razor-sharp - and if it hasn’t delegates were starkly told - it should do.

 
But as several speakers readily acknowledged, there’s a fine line between ensuring your employee doesn’t spend years in kidnap captivity and the commercial needs of the business. There’s a thin distinction between providing decent care and becoming a 'nanny state,' - a constant moan of employees as they trot around the globe.

But at the end of day, human nature will always intervene. One example from a security expert was of a US staff member trying to buy a drink at 2am in Algiers - a city once famously described by UK journalist John Simpson as one of the most dangerous on earth.

 
So the company has to be whiter than white. It has to provide a copper-bottomed guarantee that it has done absolutely everything in its power to ensure that staff are a) fully protected - insurance, medical care, travel and b) are completely in tune with the risks of whatever country they happen to be in.

 
One global accountancy firm recounted how it graded countries by risk and insisted its employees physically return an electronic form acknowledging they had understood and accepted those risks. According to the level of danger, the form would be countersigned at an appropriate managerial level, with the highest danger going right to chairman level.

 
All good common sense. But how many companies do it? How many companies in fact, at the most basic level allow their personnel to take mini-cabs for example? Everyone has a tale of dodgy wheels, old rusty cars, dangerous drivers, etc, but what do we do about it?

 
It takes a bit of guts on the employee’s part as well to raise the issue if the firm does not provide a coherent, carefully-assessed policy for every conceivable contingency.

 
No-one wants the nanny state, but no-one wants to spend a couple of years in a cellar either.

 
Addendum: Another key point of this year's ITM in Dublin was the issue of supplier pro-action. At an excellent briefing chaired by the equally excellent new ITM chairwoman, Caroline Strachan - watch ABTN pages shortly for her take on the challenges of her new role - the thought was frequently expressed that value was not a one-way street.

 
It's not simply up to TMCs and travel organisers to book say, 14 days ahead. Quite often that's simply not possible. But a little thought from suppliers - airlines and hotels for example - recognising that such and such a company has a regular travel requirement could trigger those discounts without the need for painstaking advance commitment.

 
By the way, I'm writing this following a 4.30am finish on the last night of the Conference - those who dragged me squealing to the bar know who you are - but after a thoroughly enjoyable evening at Dublin's Mansion House.

 
I will remember for a very long time the look of sheer surprise on the first act up - ABC - and in particular on the face of lead singer Martin Fry - as within a conservative estimate of 30 seconds, the entire dance floor was filled with those for whom ABC et al were the soundtrack to their schooldays. And just to better that, Andrew Strong from The Commitments film fame and his excellent, exuberant band provided a fitting finale to a great Conference.

 
Yes, the seminars were informative and enjoyable, but sometimes the human nature of the travel business is the last thing we think about - Dublin proved that this industry is alive and kicking.

 
Simon Warburton
Editor - ABTN
ITM - Dublin