Quantcast
MobileRJ | RSS TwitterTwitter FacebookFacebook E-mail Alerts
Home manage Las Vegas Review-Journal
  Jobs Cars Homes Shopping Travel Weddings Golf Best of Las Vegas Photo   Search:

RECENT EDITIONS
Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun Mon Tue

Opinion
Dec. 11, 2007
Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal

EDITORIAL: Flamingo fire safety

One rejection of public safety standards could be considered an aberration. Two incidents within the same company might be a coincidence. But three violations of a similar nature? That's trouble.

Harrah's Entertainment was working to remedy hotel room renovations that were completed at the Rio without proper permits and safety inspections when word came that similar deficiencies existed at Harrah's Las Vegas. Then, just last week, company executives learned that Flamingo Las Vegas workers were told to remove a piece of safety equipment from one floor to obtain a part so another floor would pass a fire inspection.

Most Popular Stories
  • EDITORIAL: Stood her ground
  • LETTERS: A moral obligation to not bankrupt the country
  • VIN SUPRYNOWICZ: 'Allowed' to carry for self-defense
  • LETTERS: Nursery did the right thing with laborers
  • EDITORIAL: Numbers stink?
  • LETTERS: Teachers not most important learning variable
  • EDITORIAL: Gotta have faith
  • EDITORIAL: Clunk, clunk
  • LETTERS: Agassi remains a good citizen
  • LETTERS: Put aside re-election interests for nation's good




    • As with the room renovations that weren't constructed to code, it took a whistle-blower to alert authorities. Clark County Fire Department inspectors confirmed Friday afternoon that all emergency fire doors weren't operating properly at the Flamingo, putting guest safety at risk.

    Marybel Batjer, a Harrah's Entertainment vice president for communications, wasn't aware of the problem until contacted Friday by the Review-Journal.

    "Anything that would put into question the safety system is of utmost importance to us," Ms. Batjer said.

    It's now obvious, however, that this philosophy is not appropriately ingrained in all levels of Harrah's management. Chuck Gillenwater, the carpenter who tipped the county to the problem, said his bosses were "nonchalant" about asking him to remove parts from some sections of the hotel to replace broken parts in other areas.

    Ms. Batjer said a supervisor involved in the deficient fix had been suspended pending a company investigation. Mr. Gillenwater, meanwhile, was laid off by Roman Empire Development, the Harrah's Entertainment subsidiary that does in-house improvements.

    Clark County's strict fire safety standards exist for very good reason. An electrical ground fault caused the 1980 MGM Grand fire that killed 87 people, and after the blaze, inspectors found 83 building code violations. Housing thousands of guests and workers inside massive buildings that have a limited number of exits demands extraordinary protection against spreading flame and smoke.

    It's in the best interests of Harrah's Las Vegas to make "safety first" more than a slogan for cafeteria signs and company e-mails -- executives have to make it a corporate culture to compensate for this fall's errors. Clearly, Harrah's can't afford a fourth such failure.

    Newsvine Digg Fark Technorati reddit StumbleUpon del.icio.us Slashdot Propeller Mixx Furl Twitter MySpace Facebook Google Bookmarks Yahoo! Bookmarks Windows Live Favorites Ask MyStuff myAOL Favorites

    Leave Your Comment 11 Reader Comments
    Terms & Conditions
    The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The reviewjournal.com does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please notify the web editor.

    Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 48 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
    Current Word Count:

    Note: Comments made by reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Review-Journal are presented with a yellow background.

    Report abuse

    John F wrote on December 11, 2007 08:01 PM: t,

    John and I are definitely not the same person.


    Report abuse

    t wrote on December 11, 2007 05:39 PM: john f government schill strikes again!could john and john f be one in the same?


    Report abuse

    Publius wrote on December 11, 2007 03:06 PM: John,

    Of course, those feet-voters should have the best research available to them regarding any code violations :)


    Report abuse

    John F wrote on December 11, 2007 01:52 PM: John,

    great post; I can't add anything to that.

    Having managed retaurants in and out of casinos here in LV and elsewhere for the last 20 years, in general I'd rather eat in a casino than in a free-standing restaurant. That being said, however, if cleanliness is important to you in a restaurant (and it should be), a quick look around at the public areas of the restaurant will tell all you need to know about whether a concerted effort is being made to keep the place clean.

    As far as the health inspections published in this paper every Wednesday go, I wouldn't be too concerned about those places that have a bad inspection unless they either have critical violations like foods not being held at proper temperature or evidence of infestations. The ones you really want to stay away from are those restaurants that still don't get an A rating even on a second inspection. Those places simply don't care about sanitation.

    Of course if you, like the RJ editors, believe that we should be living lives free of government regulation, stay true to your principles and don't bother reading those reports.


    Report abuse

    douglas wrote on December 11, 2007 01:30 PM: as to poster laughable's "evidence" about casino hotel's food prep safety, one need look no further than the wednesday's "restaurant report" in the lvrj. i read that weekly and notice that very rarely are there "every casino" licensees gigged for health concerns. otoh, there seems to be certain, smaller restaurant "chains" and certain well known, free standing restaurants that are "frequent flyers" to that gig list.

    perhaps the poster "laughable" prefers to eat in those "b", "c" or occasionally "closed for repeated health violations" venues instead of at the casino hotels. using a knife and fork instead of a motorcycle, perhaps the poster "laughable" would replace knievel, risking his life eating at those frequently gigged joints. me, i'd rather patronize the cleaner restaurants, the larger casino hotels, as evidenced by the health department's inspection results.


    Report abuse

    LaughingOutLoud wrote on December 11, 2007 12:31 PM: What the hell do you Rubes thingk is going on! Every Csino has been shorting the expenses on repairs and maintaince and health saftey matters after their inital opennings of each property. They dont care about anythng except their bottom lines! If a real investigation was conducted by a independent outside sourceyou would be surpried at what is going on in food preparation, health and safety areas of the casino gaming "business". Enter any Strip Hotel at your own risk!


    Report abuse

    Fafner wrote on December 11, 2007 10:04 AM: "If a few people need to die or if a few people need to get injured, I think it is more than worth it especially if the company can save a few bucks in the process and the taxpayers do not have to pay the salaries of the government employees."

    That's some of the best satire I've read in quite a while.


    Report abuse

    John wrote on December 11, 2007 09:36 AM: I do not understand why the RJ is advocating the adherence to government regulation here. Afterall the RJ routinely objects to obtrusive regulation by local, state and federal government in all aspects of business.

    I say let the free market work. If the lack of adherence to public safety standards results in unsafe conditions for the company's patrons, the company's patrons should have the opportunity to weigh whether the risks outweigh the benefits.

    We need less government regulation, not more. If a few people need to die or if a few people need to get injured, I think it is more than worth it especially if the company can save a few bucks in the process and the taxpayers do not have to pay the salaries of the government employees.

    Free markets not the government should control here. Clearly each company knows what is best for itself and its patrons so do not let those pesky regulators and inspectors inject themselves where they have no business being.


    Report abuse

    douglas wrote on December 11, 2007 09:10 AM: fwiw, even with only a few "code" classes, i continually see "violations" of one sort or another when patronizing many businesses. in fact i recall that one of the "code" classrooms had egress doors 2 inches narrower than "code" for the number of occupants.


    the question might be if building officials should be revisiting structures that have already received certificates of occupancy. that would be a can of worms.


    Report abuse

    whatever wrote on December 11, 2007 08:39 AM: Harrah's isn't the only group in this valley to put guests & employees at risk because of their (lack of) safety practices. If OSHA would do more surprise & unscheduled inspections for the employees sake and the city/county inspectors for the guests sake I bet we would all be surprised (maybe not) at the level to which the almighty dollar is more valuable than human life in the hotel/casino industry.


    Read All Comments