9 Hotels in L.A. Region Made Lockout Pact

Nine major Los Angeles-area hotels that broke off contract negotiations with the hotel workers union this week are partners in a bargaining pact similar to one supermarket chains relied on during a five-month strike and lockout that ended in February.

The agreement requires all the hotels to lock out union workers if the Hotel Employees and Restaurant Employees International Union strikes just one of them. If six of the hotels opt for a so-called offensive lockout -- essentially a strike forced on union members by management -- all nine must participate.

The hotels, negotiating as the Los Angeles Hotel Employers Council, refused to extend the union’s contract after it expired June 1, opening the door to a strike or lockout affecting as many as 3,000 workers.

Hotel attorney Ken Ballard said he “couldn’t rule out” an employer-initiated lockout, even in the middle of the summer tourism season. But he added, “It is aggressive and one hopes you never have to use it.”

The pact was signed three months ago, before contract talks began. A copy was made available to The Times on Thursday.

A similar pact requiring joint lockouts signed by three major supermarket chains gave them an edge during the grocery walkout, helping the markets win wage and benefit concessions despite widespread participation in the strike by members of the United Food and Commercial Workers union.

Labor leaders said that kind of cooperation had become increasingly common as large employers tried to reduce labor costs while confronting militant unions. Said Maria Elena Durazo, president of Local 11 of the hotel workers union, “They certainly are trying to assert a different kind of pressure than they ever have before.”

She said the lockout pact underscored why the union must consolidate its strength. The union is taking a novel approach, trying to line up contracts in 10 major cities to expire in 2006. That could set the stage for a national strike.

National hotel chains are strongly opposed to having contracts expire in the same year. On Tuesday, they cut off negotiations in Los Angeles, declaring there was no point in talking until the union agreed to change its demand for a two-year contract expiring in 2006.

The union is taking the hotels’ last offer, for a five-year contract, to a membership vote July 1.

Many union leaders predicted it would be defeated, saying they were united on the need for a 2006 expiration date. “It gives us more power,” said Carlos Garcia, a kitchen helper at the Millennium Biltmore in downtown L.A. for six years.

Garcia said he earned $11.25 an hour now and would see only a 70-cent increase over the entire five-year contract offer. The hotels also want employees to co-pay for health insurance for the first time -- $10 a week. Garcia said that would all but wipe out his small raise.

The hotel council said it would drop the co-pay if the union agreed to a five-year deal.

Hotel housekeepers also complained about heavy workloads, which they said have grown since hotels cut back staff after the 2001 tourism slump. They said that as hotels added creature comforts for guests, their workloads continued to rise.

“I have to clean 15 rooms every day,” said Aida Marmol, a housekeeper at downtown L.A.’s Westin Bonaventure for 14 years. “I have to get on my knees to clean the bathroom, and if they find one hair, they discipline us. I could be fired.”

Local President Durazo said the hotels had refused to discuss reducing housekeeper workloads. Hotel attorney Ballard called union proposals about workloads “onerous” and said they would require as much as a doubling of staff. He also said some workloads had decreased as hotels give guests the option to not have their sheets changed every day.

The hotel council represents some of the area’s most prestigious hotels. They are the Hyatt Regency Los Angeles, Hyatt West Hollywood, Westin Century Plaza, St. Regis, Sheraton Universal, Wilshire Grand Hotel & Centre, Millennium Biltmore, Regent Beverly Wilshire and Westin Bonaventure.

Ballard said that as early as next week the hotels could begin to unilaterally impose some conditions from their last offer, and mentioned the $10 weekly co-payments for insurance. That is expected to cause a stir with union members.

Meanwhile, union members are expected to overwhelmingly reject the contract and then demand that hotel negotiators sit down and continue talking.

No early resolution of the dispute seems likely.

“This could be the beginning of a long, hot summer,” said Miguel Contreras, head of the Los Angeles County Federation of Labor. “The employers are playing hardball, but the union is in the game. This is going to be very different from what we saw with the retail clerks and the supermarkets.”