The Hyatt Hotel in Boston laid off its entire housekeeping staff, some who had been with them for 20 years, and hired a new "outsourced" crew.  The "outsourced" crew had come to the hotel to be trained and the permanent crew were told they were Hyatt employees who would be getting jobs elsewhere or working to fill in when necessary.  That was a lie.  They were not Hyatt employees, and one day the permanent crew came in and were given their pink slips and the people they had trained were doing their jobs.  This is so wrong on so many level.  There has been a snow ball effect and a lot of people had let Hyatt know that they won't be staying at their hotels, there have been protests, but it would take so much more.  I, for one, did spend a couple of hours on the picket line, and am urging everyone to avoid the Hyatt from now on.


www.boston.com/business/articles/2009/09/17/housekeepers_lose_hyatt_jobs_to_outsourcing/

Don't laid off employees have to be hired back first over new ones, or at least be given the chance?

It is effed up though, and I'll be avoiding Hyatt places - for the amount of money they charge for rooms, you'd think they could keep the higher-paid cleaning staff.

Nicole got laid off from SteinMart - last day was yesterday - they eliminated the receiving department altogether. I feel the housekeepers' pain.

Ant

Don't laid off employees have to be hired back first over new ones, or at least be given the chance?

Ant


No.

Don't laid off employees have to be hired back first over new ones, or at least be given the chance?



Depends on their separation package. And it also depends on whether they are unionized or not - but even then unions aren't doing what they are supposed to. :-\\

Depends on their separation package. And it also depends on whether they are unionized or not - but even then unions aren't doing what they are supposed to. :-\\
'

Non-union, no separation package, no nothing.  There was such a to do the Governor got involved and appealed to the Hyatt management, and requested state employees not patronize the Hyatt. Three Hyatts and 100 staffers, all the housekeeping staff were involved.  The Hyatt responded by offering the workers jobs with the company that they have outsourced to, Hospitality Solutions out of Georgia, but they would not be working at the Hyatts, which leads me to believe that this "outsourcing company" is probably controlled by Hyatt or by hotels which use this "outsource" help. The company brought the workers up from Georgia, homegrown USA scabs.

The local union that cover "hospitality workers" is quite active here and sent over picketers.

This is typical anti-labor crap.  As Joe Hill said as he was about to be shot "Don't waste time morning, ORGANIZE - ORGANIZE.

This is typical anti-labor crap.  As Joe Hill said as he was about to be shot "Don't waste time morning, ORGANIZE - ORGANIZE.


Quite certainly the American labor movement has done an exceedingly poor job at organizing, which is why the SEIU split from the AFL-CIO (The SEIU seeing the AFL-CIO as wimps when it comes to organizing).

Hotel workers should be an "easy sell" to organize.

As an aside regarding the "outsourcing" aspect of this situation...  There is an entire industry of people whose sole job is to sell the idea of "outsourcing" or "offshoring" (essentially outsourcing to people overseas).  A former school chum (I use that term loosely) is one of these guys whose sole job is to call companies to see if he can help them to shove people out the door faster and faster and give the jobs to somebody overseas.  A rather sad way to spend one's life as I see it.

In some cases outsourcing makes good sense.  Functions such as freight management, for a very small company, are usually best outsourced to a big firm that can do things better and cheaper.  But if you look at the maids at a hotel, outsourcing really does not produce any "value" and it is a simple transfer of wealth from the former workers to the outsourcing company.

The Hyatt battle may be lost.  But the SEIU (or other union) ought to directly mount an organizing effort on the outsourcing company.

The Hyatt battle may be lost.  But the SEIU (or other union) ought to directly mount an organizing effort on the outsourcing company.



The local SEIU here is very active.  The head, Janice Loux, is a tough one, and very active in organizing.  I am sure they tried and failed to unionize the Hyatt workers, and I am sure they are sorry they didn't. 

This is just repulsive!  About 7 years ago the company my husband worked for was outsourcing his department and he had to train his replacement.  Why would he do such a thing, you ask?  His buy-out package had this as a stipulation!  Yes, it sucks, but he did receive all of the money he was entitled (and was also paid as a consultant afterward).

This Hyatt thing though, is repulsive as I've stated, and I could not stay at their hotel knowing this.

NO CABS FOR SCABS

I just liked the slogan, though the term "scab" doesn't really apply here.


Taxi drivers to boycott Hyatt over firings

September 24, 2009

By Megan Woolhouse, Globe Staff

Union officials at the Boston Taxi Drivers Association said they faxed a letter to the Hyatt yesterday saying taxi drivers would boycott the Hyatt, refusing to service the hotel's Boston locations, unless the housekeepers the chain fired last month were rehired.

The union represents 1,700 taxi drivers, according to Arthur Rose, a union representative.

Similarly, the Eastern Sociological Society, a group of sociology professionals and scholars, said it would withdraw its business unless the chain reconsidered its actions.

The moves by the groups are a response to Hyatt's firing of 98 hotel workers -- many 20-plus year employees of the corporation -- earlier on Aug. 31, and replacing them with workers from a Georgia-based staffing company. In a front page story in the Globe on Sept. 17, the housekeepers claimed that they had to train their replacements and told that the staffing agency workers were only vacation replacements. The former staff housekeepers at the center of the Hyatt controversy -- mostly minority women -- made about $15 an hour or $26,000 a year.

Hyatt officials have said in an e-mail that they regretted the firings and had to make "very difficult decisions to adjust costs in response to continuing declines in revenues."

Criticism of the company has increased. Union activists have launched a "Save the Hyatt 100" site on Facebook. And on Tuesday, Gov. Deval Patrick thrust the issue into the national spotlight, taking the unusual step of threatening a government boycott of the hotel chain.

One of the sick things these corporations do is require the employees being sh*tcanned to train their replacements.  I'd tell management where they can go and where they can stick it when they get there!
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/03/countdown.gif

BTW, it's my guess that few of those hotel workers were getting paid $15 an hour; the company just wants people who will work for minimum...or less if they're undocumented workers.

NO CABS FOR SCABS

I just liked the slogan, though the term "scab" doesn't really apply here.


Taxi drivers to boycott Hyatt over firings

September 24, 2009

By Megan Woolhouse, Globe Staff

Union officials at the Boston Taxi Drivers Association said they faxed a letter to the Hyatt yesterday saying taxi drivers would boycott the Hyatt, refusing to service the hotel's Boston locations, unless the housekeepers the chain fired last month were rehired.

The union represents 1,700 taxi drivers, according to Arthur Rose, a union representative.

Similarly, the Eastern Sociological Society, a group of sociology professionals and scholars, said it would withdraw its business unless the chain reconsidered its actions.

The moves by the groups are a response to Hyatt's firing of 98 hotel workers -- many 20-plus year employees of the corporation -- earlier on Aug. 31, and replacing them with workers from a Georgia-based staffing company. In a front page story in the Globe on Sept. 17, the housekeepers claimed that they had to train their replacements and told that the staffing agency workers were only vacation replacements. The former staff housekeepers at the center of the Hyatt controversy -- mostly minority women -- made about $15 an hour or $26,000 a year.

Hyatt officials have said in an e-mail that they regretted the firings and had to make "very difficult decisions to adjust costs in response to continuing declines in revenues."

Criticism of the company has increased. Union activists have launched a "Save the Hyatt 100" site on Facebook. And on Tuesday, Gov. Deval Patrick thrust the issue into the national spotlight, taking the unusual step of threatening a government boycott of the hotel chain.

One of the sick things these corporations do is require the employees being sh*tcanned to train their replacements.  I'd tell management where they can go and where they can stick it when they get there!
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/03/countdown.gif

BTW, it's my guess that few of those hotel workers were getting paid $15 an hour; the company just wants people who will work for minimum...or less if they're undocumented workers.




This is fan-damn-tastic news.

I kind of wonder why there is the big stink on this Hyatt deal.

Don't get me wrong, Hyatt has handled this like scum bags.

But this "fire the employees and outsource it to another company that pays lower wages" is going on every day and in big numbers.  Why not a larger outcry?  Or is this Hyatt deal the start of a new mobement to resist non-value-added outsourcing?

I kind of wonder why there is the big stink on this Hyatt deal.

Don't get me wrong, Hyatt has handled this like scum bags.

But this "fire the employees and outsource it to another company that pays lower wages" is going on every day and in big numbers.  Why not a larger outcry?  Or is this Hyatt deal the start of a new movement to resist non-value-added outsourcing?


I think because this was such a blatant, in your face, in Massachusetts thing.  We native, working class, Bay Staters are known for being reactionary to this sort of thing.