The recent firing of nearly 100 housekeepers from Boston area Hyatt Hotels has garnered reaction around the country. Governor Deval Patrick threatened a state boycott of the chain if management didn’t offer the workers their jobs back.
The hotelier says the job cuts were a result of economic pressures, but did offer to re-hire the workers through a temporary staffing company, and agreed to pay their full benefits through next March. The workers say they’ll accept nothing but the full employment they had up until the firing.
This week, we’ll take a look at labor issues through the lense of this controversy, and ask some tough questions about the plight of service workers in a down economy, and the responsiblilty a company has to it’s loyal employees. Join us this Friday at 1.
How much is the Hyatt saving by outsourcing the housekeeping jobs? Previously the Hyatt paid their housekeepers $15, and now the outsourced housekeepers will be paid $8 per hour. But no one has said how much the Hyatt will be paying HSS (or USC).
This is quite unbelievable. Companies all over the map are downsizing, regretfully having layoffs, taking cost cutting measures. Why Hyatt is being singled out is beyond comprehension. They are simply reacting to the recession. Why NPR is spending so much time reporting on this case is equally unbelieveble!! Every company has a right to reduce their expenses. Per your guest Brian, Housekeeping=”most important profit center” for the hotel industry. With all due respect, is he kidding?? Why aren’t you reporting on the millions that the President and first lady just spent flying to Copenhagen. They obviously(we all did) thought it was a shoe in for Chicago. The media was reporting on the “very positive reaction” to the Obamas, that it was implied by the committees reaction, that this was a successful journey for the Obamas. Air force 1 and 2, staff, security…how many millions were spent(and lost) for this trip to copenhagen for this failed publicity stint. How about reporting on this!! Ugh!
I am planning to stay in Boston this weekend for one night in an upscale hotel, and I guarantee you that as a result of Hyatt’s actions, this corporation will not even be considered. In effect, I am personally punishing Hyatt’s bottom line.
Make no mistake: As a for-profit corporation, cutting costs such as labor is indeed management’s duty to its shareholders. Likewise, as person with a moral compass, it is my duty to act responsibly in a manner that positively influences corporate behavior, and the society in which we live.
The caller from Concord asserted that these firings were necessary “to protect higher-value jobs.” That has always been the excuse for mistreating the lowest-rung workers. During the US Civil War, Joseph E. Brown, the Confederate Governor of the Confederacy, asserted that poor white farmers, “will never consent to submit to abolition rule,” since “they would be greater sufferers than the rich, who would be able to protect themselves,” and that, “the Negro is in no sense [the white man's] equal.” In other words, the Confederates needed slavery to protect their higher-value workers.
Fortunately, this argument was rejected by the nascent British textile labor unions, even though their workers were unemployed due to the embargo of southern US cotton. These poor workers realized that if their government recognized the Confederacy as an independent nation and forced open trade with the rebel states, the successful example of oppression for economic reasons would easily be applied to their situation. Simply put, if you can do this to some workers, why can’t it be done to all workers?
I wrote too quickly. My correction to the above:
During the US Civil War, Joseph E. Brown, the Confederate Governor of Georgia …
Sorry about that. I couldn’t get through on the phone, so I hope this point of view will be noted via the web.
Just wanted to make a note, this happens to be National Housekeeper Appreciation Week. I work for another hotel brand, and this news about the Hyatt has raised a lot of discussion and questions about unions and the job security of our own staff, so I would like to thank you for focusing todays show on such important local news.
A mostly socialist program. The one person who stuck up for Hyatt was cut off. I don’t see why a company MUST hire workers. I’m not saying that their decision was the best business decision (obviously NOT for PR reasons).
The publics reaction is simply part of a larger cultural sign that shows that Americans feel they are owed something. That we are entitled. That large corporate structures or big government can simply borrow or somehow get money and pay.
Maybe the government should take over the Hyatt, rehire the workers and simply add the acquisition and salaries to the national debt.
There is no question that the layoffs were handled poorly. However, there is a recession going on and workers are being laid off everywhere, at all levels and most are not being offered re-employment (even if for less money) or job retraining. Have people forgotten about the car industry and the banking industry (most of whom were also laid off due to the mistakes of their management and with far more innocent victims effected).
Unfortunately, this national cry for a boycott will end up hurting more innocent bystanders. Wedding parties are being thrown into chaos, non-profit annual events are losing attendance, and current hotel workers are facing potential job losses due to the boycott and will most certainly not be given other employment options.
It’s easy to say the Hyatt screwed up. Do we make things better by putting more innocent people and charities at risk by the boycott? At a minimum, people should separate lodging from special events so more people don’t have to suffer from this poor management decision.
Hyatt handled this poorly. But how different is what they did than every other company who has outsourced jobs? We can wring our hands and shout how awful Hyatt is. And we can make ourselves feel better by saying we’ll boycott Hyatt (which is easy). But I wonder if we’re willing to do anything difficult, like buy things that are made in this country that cost more.
Oh and it’s pretty boring to have three people who are on one side of this issue. Talk about living in an echo chamber. Maybe Hyatt didn’t want to participate, but couldn’t you find someone who had a different view. Someone who understands what companies must do in a competitive environment. Or even (though I’ll never see this on Radio Boston), a well spoken anti-union expert.
Hyatt handled this poorly. But how different is what they did than every other company who has outsourced jobs? We can wring our hands and shout how awful Hyatt is. And we can make ourselves feel better by saying we’ll boycott Hyatt (which is easy). But I wonder if we’re willing to do anything difficult, like buy things that are made in this country that cost more.
Oh and it’s pretty boring to have three people who are on one side of this issue. Talk about living in an echo chamber. Maybe Hyatt didn’t want to participate, but couldn’t you find someone who had a different view. Someone who understands what companies must do in a competitive environment. Or even (though I’ll never see this on Radio Boston), a well spoken anti-union expert.
Hyatt could have laid off a few workers to proportionately compensate for the down turn in business, but I don’t think that was the goal. My cynical side says that they are taking advantage of the situation to change their business model permanently. They certainly won’t give back what they take away when business picks up, will they?
I read an article that housekeepers at Hyatt hotel in Boston were asked to train some new workers and were told that those trainees would be filling in during vacations. It turned out that those trainees were employees of Georgia company who were tasked to replace them.