A house policy is a documented framework for each separate venue that outlines rules and expectations, which should include how to identify and respond to an incident.

Venues should review their existing House Policies to include a basic definition of sexual harassment and assault, and can outline:

• Staff responses to an incident actively occurring

• Staff responses to an incident that has previously occurred that is now being reported

• “What to do”

• “What not to do”

• Clear procedural response

• Signage requirements

House Policies can be displayed in venues to communicate with patrons of expectations of their behaviours.

Venues discussed how the 'point of entry' process into the premise can communicate cultural expectations to patrons, such as having a consistent 'door person' to help identify and mitigate potentially problematic patrons before they enter the event, and also aesthetically identify with the culture of the venue, i.e. personability and aesthetics.

Subsequent discussion to what qualifications and skills are desirable in a door person, and the benefits and disadvantages in having an in-house hospitality worker or security/crowd controller presence.

Venues identified at-risk times for vulnerable patrons as sites of intervention. This identified the end-of-the-night process when venues are required to remove patrons, where being intoxicated or alone place heightened vulnerability to be targeted by unsafe behaviours. Strategies included:

• Staffing the door on exit to help observe patrons leaving,

• Improving street front lighting,

• Staggering exit times,

• Training staff in how to identify potential high-risk exit situations

• Assessing duty of care to assist patrons in ordering ride share or taxis if unable to do so themselves.

The workshop discussions identified how different liquor licensing rules can impact the process of removing patrons at the end of the night. i.e. the Mojo’s licence allows the venue to continue to have patrons inside the premises after the service of alcohol ends, whereas Connection’s nightclub licence requires patrons to be removed within 15 minutes. This could offer possible insight into how exit procedures are supported/hindered by licensing rules.

Signage within venues and messaging over communication channels (such as social media) were enthusiastically identified for potential to communicate a venue’s cultural expectations of inclusivity and respect.

Possible signage included “Consent is Sexy”, “No means no” or “Good vibes for all”.

It was identified that respective venues each have a brand identity that would impact whether signage would take a zero-tolerance punitive tone, or a positive engagement tone.

‘Safe spaces’ were discussed for their importance in access to quieter, lower sensory areas (i.e. less lighting changes) in a venue for neurodivergent or anxious patrons; as was ‘safe space’ for clear areas to smoke, where nicotine was discussed as a stigmatised anti-psychotic management for some patrons.

It was also identified in how managers can move around venues to observe, provide visibility and lighting in ‘safe spaces’ in the venue. Higher risk areas were identified for each venue team, such as areas that are low lit or have limited visibility from the bar.

Practical resources were discussed, with vested interest in finding ways to turn the training’s presentation slide on “sexual harassment vs. mutual flirting” into venue signage or available information to empower patrons to understanding and thus self-identifying their own experiences of harassment.

The discussion also extended to creating and distributing ‘business card’ style printed tools for patrons who identify assault or harassment for after-care, with numbers for SARC and mental health lines.

Venues discussed how programming different music events attracted different audiences and demographics.

Strategies suggested identifying which music genres or events may attract high-risk demographics or patterns of behaviour so that venues can proactively communicate with security contractors and local police liaisons about which nights may require additional mitigation strategies, and/or appropriately staffing workers and security who are trained in responding to incidents.

Employees of venues teams discussed the need for additional in-house and venue-specific training from management (in skills in how to assess potential risks before incidents occur, inclusive and respectful language, and procedures), and in respect of manager’s duty of care for their wellbeing.

Venues were encouraging of providing wellbeing services (such as Access Wellbeing) to provide counselling and care even to casual employed staff in the hospitality sector.

Group discussions around gender identity also highlighted appropriate procedures for responding to misgendering patrons, improving venue inclusivity and culture for all patrons. This is identified as a top-down process, where management were empowered with value learnings on identity for both disabled and queer groups.

It was discussed that disabled patrons are often overlooked and the training content that described how to provide respectful service to patrons with a disability was enthusiastically taken on, with intention to provide to staff.

Venues now seek to re-evaluate their infrastructure, reflect on building codes and provide online resources for access patrons on how to access their venue and ensuring companion card holders are admitted free-of-charge.

The importance of having gender-safety in bathrooms was a central conversation in the inclusion module, where gender neutral bathrooms and providing ‘safe spaces’ for patrons needs to be reviewed for gender identity, offering additional signage in bathrooms, and the impact of using the ‘accessible’ disability bathrooms as a gender-neutral solution. Connections (as an LGBTQIA+ venue) was an invaluable asset to these discussions to explore how they manage and respond to patrons in gender neutral bathrooms. Building codes were identified as an area of possible future recommendations about requirements to provide gender neutral bathrooms for venues, and discussed whether it would be more effective to have ‘female’ and ‘gender neutral’ bathroom, removing the male-only bathroom.

The group enthusiastically discussed the potential of peer-led resources and support by creating a bigger network of Perth venues engaged in Safer Venues initiatives.

WhatsApp, Facebook and message groups are identified as existing support tools within the venue management community network in their local areas, so that teams can communicate and alert other local venues when they identify at-risk patrons.

This community structure was further discussed in how it could be applied with the Safer Venues network. All participants agreed that having more venues in the training program could create a network of peers looking to improve their respective venues, furthering the positive impacts of group discussions and workshopping ideas and experiences. They strongly recommended more venues participate in the training to create a network of ‘accredited’ trained teams into a communication stream together for future networking events and opportunities.