Update! Hyatt Hotel Owners Respond to Boycott


Oh please, really?

They were advised to be cautious, and that if they ever felt unsafe with someone approaching them at home or trying to enter their home without invitation, that they should contact the police immediately

Proud union member here, but you're stretching on this one. I tell you what, anybody, and I mean anybody tries to come into my house uninvited, and you can bet your ass I am calling the police too.
Well, all the union has to do is evidence. That seems simple enough.

Uh, are you seriously under the impression that the press release is presenting the scenario in a realistic way that is favorable to union organizers?

Here's what I think usually happens: a union organizer will ring someone's doorbell and try to speak to the worker.

Here's what the Hyatt person wants you to think happens: a burly union thug bangs on your door, demands that you open up, and then physically forces his way past the doorway.

Here's what the Hyatt person wants its employees to do: as soon as they become aware of a union organizer approaching their home, whether it's walking up the path to the front door of the house or buzzing from the intercom on the apartment building, they think someone has trespassed into their home and is threatening them and so should call the police (or maybe fire a gun).

Poof. Bubble burst.

A few YT vérité streams would clear up the confusion.
The Stranger doesn't abide by those contract, or any contract for that matter, either. Isn't the management here just as culpable?
The hotel also isn't bound by sharia law... I mean, they don't have to, but they could.
*well, at least the terms that don't run up against the american justice system... cutting off thieves hands and such
Still waiting for The Stranger to unionize...still waiting....
You're kidding, right? They get to smoke dope and get drunk on the job, and they should unionize? For what? Better working conditions? Ha ha ha.
In 1983, when the Olympic Hotel flipped from Westin to Four Seasons (now it's a Fairmont), Four Seasons kept the union out by paying slightly over the union wage, and having a disciplinary process similar to the union. But Four Seasons is a Canadian company. Hyatt has always been sort of sleazy, as this ridiculous fear campaign demonstrates.

That's one of the advantages of having a strong union - they keep the prevailing wage high, even at non-union shops.
Immigrant workers take on millionaire owner... Courageous, noble, scary. The company says the word "police" to instill fear -- plain and simple.
@11, so the non-union shops pay slightly more than the union shops. So why does McGinn say Trader Joe's pays less than the union grocers ?
Chef dear, I cited one specific example of an enlightened company exceeding the union's offer back in 1983. There is no way that anyone can look at the hotel market in Seattle and say there is a strong union presence. Indeed, I'd be curious as to how generous Four Seasons was when they opened their new hotel, since the labor market has changed so much, and their ownership is different than it was.

I know you're always in a hurry to turn everything into a celebration of all things Ed Murrary, but it just doesn't fit in this instance.
From what I've heard, this is a pretty common union busting tactic for companies who have been targeted for organization. The companies tell their employees something to the effect of, "If you ever feel threatened by someone from the union, don't hesitate to contact police, HR, etc."

Which leaves employees thinking there have been problems with threats or intimidation by the Big Bad Union, who are apparently just like those movie gangsters who show up at people's houses and say stuff like, "Nice little place ya gots here. Be a shame if summin happened to it."