I'm not sure there needs to be a law for this, but the basic notion of creating a special device isn't that far fetched.

Think of the Star Trek Next Generation touch communicator badges.

Along time ago (early 90s) at Xerox PARC, Xerox developed the PARCTAB (before cellphones, before Palm Pilot):

The PARCTAB focused on

"extreme portability.

The device is designed to be carried or worn at all times, much like a pager. It's size, weight, and features are intended to promote casual, spur of the moment, computing. For example, it has no power switch and instead automatically turns itself on when a person starts interacting and off after a person has finished interacting.

Constant connectivity.

The system assumes the palm-top unit is always connected to the network infrastructure.

Location reporting.

The location of each PARCTAB is always known to system software."

Considering that most hotel service is in fact performed by women, and that hotel managers report this is in fact a real problem

And considering the costs of

a) doubling up maids (which is another suggestion solution)

b) lawsuits

And noting how many motels already have wifi

There may be a real market for hotel maids to carry around a Star Trek like, touch to communicate, HOTELTAB, that is constantly reporting location, and allows housekeeping to quickly, swiftly, report a dangerous situation.

I had heard (though I've never this myself) that some companies already have RFID badges that constantly update the phone system so that phone calls follow employees as they wander through a building.

I do recall at least one Star Trek TNG episode where the computer was asked where an individual was (was it Picard?) to find out that individual had somehow left the ship. (Perhaps to accost housekeepers on Riza.)

Is this law being proposed because of the IMF pig? A whole law because of one incident? This is really about this legislator using this one incident to garner some publicity for himself. Is there any evidence that hotel maids are at any more risk than any other woman?

It's not only the cost of the devices and the network to monitor them. Every time the state creates a law, they have to create a mechanism to enforce the law. So you're going to have more equipment, technicians, paper work, inspections, bureaucrats, fines, more costs added to your hotel bill, more intrusion of government into the work place and our lives for a solution that may not work to a problem that may not exist.

There are phones in every hotel room and almost everyone has a cell phone, devices that are readily available and that everyone knows how to use.

And even if they don't have a cell-phone -- how hard would it be to rig up a life-alert system -- you know "I've fallen and I can't get up."

The big question the has to be asked first: Has the number of rapes, murders, assaults and thefts of hotel staff, on duty, on premises, gone above 0.05%? And what will this really stop?

This would be bad law.

The technology is easy, but it wouldn't accomplish much.

>> notifies hotel management of an emergency

and they dispatch their crack team of ... bellhops?

if you've got an honest emergency, call the police using your tele-o-phone. You could even put them on a new technology known as speedy dial.

She'd be better off yelling "FIRE!"

Why didn't she yell, anyway? There's a lot about this story I don't understand.

Lets assume for the sake of argument that this law was passed ten years ago, and that the guy is guilty of everything he is accused of

This maid still would have been assulated the only thing that would have been differnt is the theoretical response time of the authorites

ANd thanks to Warren v. District of Columbia and dozens of other cases a better reponse time is NOT gaurenteed

And another thing, if the government is not responsible for ensuring a citizens saftey(and personally I dont think it should be) then how can that same government while holding itself immune to legal repercussions force a private corperation to assume those liabilities?

She was was dragged into an interior room of a large suite in a posh hotel in NYC, which means nice heavy doors and probably some sound proofing to suppress street noise. It's not surprising that no one could hear her. I'm skeptical by nature, but what I've heard of her account seems credible and mirrors those of other women he's assaulted.

But the account also suggests that an emergency transmitter may not have been of much use. He took her by surprise and was able to manhandle her effectively. Pepper spray or a knife would be a better option, but it's unlikely that a NY legislator would approve of someone actually defending themselves.

And even if they don't have a cell-phone -- how hard would it be to rig up a life-alert system -- you know "I've fallen and I can't get up."

I spent a fair bit of time in a factory where they had those "man-down" portable phones that operators working on their own carried. Put one down on the table after calling a supervisor to witness a test after making a change to the control system. Oops. Incident report time - with the notation "accidental trigger by contractor". Oh well.

I don't think this should be legislated. If it was, most likely you end up with a useless and expensive "government standard" system anyway. But I wouldn't trust a cell phone either. Too slow given a determined assailant. If you really wanted to protect staff, some sort of dead man switch is needed. For instance, press a button every minute or alarm goes off (like they do on trains), an easily broken wire round the waist - all sorts of ways to do it - would work better.

Expensive and you'll get lots of false positives from accidental triggers. Which tends to lower people's guard too. When was the last time you ran to check out a car alarm?

Just give them each their own personal dog. Added benefit - the dog can drag someone to a safe place.