The sultan of Brunei's announcement that his country will be imposing a strict version of Shariah law has triggered boycotts of the Dorchester Collection of hotels, which the sultan owns. The iconic Beverly Hills Hotel is a part of that collection, and any number of Hollywood and other celebrities have come out in favor of the boycott.
Jay Leno and Ellen DeGeneres were on the picket lines, and Kim Kardashian soon weighed in. Richard Branson has asked his staff to avoid the property and cautioned them about scheduling any events there.
So let me ask you: To what degree should we be considering the religious beliefs and practices of those with majority ownership positions in hotel chains, tour companies or cruise lines?
The sultan of Brunei is one of the world's wealthiest men. So a few boycotts, some lost convention business, loss of lunch business and room nights clearly hurts the hotel staff more than the hotel's owner in his far-away kingdom.
There was one important aspect of this boycott that was missing. The Hollywood types and their well-heeled supporters, did not, to my knowledge, set up a fund to cover the tips and salaries that the hotel's staff members will lose because of the boycotts. Had they planned ahead to assure the financial well-being of the hotel workers, I would have found the moral underpinnings of the boycotts more meaningful.
This is a difficult path for the travel consultant. How do we decide who is ethically deserving of our business? And, by the way, how far do we go to inform our clients about hotels we think they ought to boycott?
I don't know the sultan of Brunei personally, but I have clients who do. One was invited to that tiny country to participate in a sports competition. On the second day, the sultan walked up to my client and asked how he was enjoying his time in the kingdom. "Well, OK, I guess," he said, "given the fact that there are no women here."
My client told me that the sultan smiled. That evening he sent his jet to Paris, where a major fashion show was just ending, and it returned with about 25 top French models. A party was arranged. There's more to this story, but best if I stop by noting that there was a second party.
I worry about boycotts because there doesn't seem to be an end game. If the travelseller sets her/himself up as the moral arbiter of destination and accommodation choices, where exactly does that path lead?
Estimates of the size of the gay and lesbian community in the U.S. range from 5% to 12% of the population.
Atheists likely represent a higher percentage of Americans, but they seem not to be organized enough to mount a major travel boycott or even a cookie sale.
Evangelicals, however, currently represent the largest percentage of the three groups. They are 30% of the U.S. population, extremely well organized and not necessarily opposed to punishing those who practice homosexuality. The Bible, after all, has some nasty things to say about the practice.
Not long ago, I was invited to attend a meeting of a prestigious hotel group. It was a confidential session, and the highlight was the announcement that the group would be the first to launch a major gay-friendly marketing campaign that would include front-desk sensitivity training on issues such as the best way to inquire about bedding preferences at check-in.
It was a feel-good meeting, and it echoed the sentiments in our industry that it was about time that a major hotel group admitted that it welcomed alternative-lifestyle guests. Everyone in the room was ecstatic. Each property would be certified gay-friendly.
Then, I was asked my opinion. I sort of killed the mood when I suggested that churchgoers were a significantly larger group in America than gays and lesbians and that some of them might have real problems choosing the most gay-friendly hotel in a city. I thought it was a fine attitude but a terrible marketing idea. I was not invited back.
A recent Gallup poll revealed that 42% of American adults believe in angels -- as in, they think they're real. Perhaps we should launch a boycott against hotels whose ownership does not subscribe to angel-belief.
My point is, as we try to navigate paths of righteousness, are we really prepared to make these decisions?
One of the obvious comparisons when it comes to hotel ownership's beliefs regarding the LGBT community, is Marriott International, a public company that is controlled by members of the Mormon Church. That faith is opposed to alcohol consumption. Yet, the last time I looked, you could still find liquor bottles in the Marriott minibar.
Likewise, the Mormon Church actively campaigned against the legalization of gay marriage in California, but Bill Marriott has walked a very fine line by taking care of all guests no matter what their sexual orientation might be, while offering alcohol options to those guests who want them. He has separated his brand from his church, I think rather successfully.
A report for Business Insider by Kim Bhasin made it clear that fast-food chain Chick-fil-A has been far less delicate. Chick-fil-A's charity arm donates millions to anti-gay-marriage groups, and Dan Cathy, their CEO, regularly makes speeches "inviting God's judgement on our nation." All Chick-fil-A locations are closed on Sundays. Nothing could send a stronger message to evangelicals.
Should all travel firms be closed on Sundays? Should we speak publicly about our beliefs so that the clients who are with us are really with us?
Qatar Airways, is, in my opinion, one of the top three airlines in the world. But in Qatar, the wealthiest nation on earth, people convicted of homosexuality may be subjected to "lashings" followed by imprisonment. Intimacy in public between men and women, including teenagers, can lead to arrest. Should we be sending people to Qatar? Or booking its airline?
While we are at it, perhaps we should be declining credit charges on a Bank of America credit card. Qatar holds a $1 billion stake in B of A.
Saudi Arabia is strictly anti-gay, and its laws pertaining to sexuality are enforced by the Commission for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice, a branch of its security force popularly known as the "religious police." Homosexuals can be stoned to death.
The key travel industry player in Saudi Arabia is Al-Waleed bin Talal. Just ahead of the sultan of Brunei on the Forbes list, Al-Waleed owns the largest stake in Citicorp, so a boycott in this case is going to mean turning down a lot of credit card transactions.
Just for fun, he also owns the Four Seasons Hotel George V in Paris. He has held large stakes in the Plaza Hotel in New York and, along with Bill Gates, in the Four Seasons Hotel chain. (Given that connection, would it be appropriate to boycott Microsoft?)
Should travelsellers be supporting tourism in Kenya, a country where homosexuality carries a sentence of 14 years in prison, which can increase to 21 years under "extenuating circumstances"?
So here we sit at our desks, the world at our fingertips. But what moral compass guides us in our planning? Should we ever say, "No, I won't"?
Read part 1 of Richard Turen's boycott column, "Boycotting beds: Sleeping with a clear conscience."
Contributing Editor Richard Bruce Turen owns Churchill & Turen Ltd., a luxury vacation firm based in Naples, Fla. He is also managing director of the Churchill Group, a sales training and marketing consultancy. Contact him at rturen@travelweekly.com.