Which would you think costs more to run: a unionized hotel or a hotel without unionized employees?
This isn’t a topic you hear discussed publicly often at hotel industry conference, nor is it necessarily intuitive question to answer. One reason: Pay rates between the two can differ, with non-unionized hotels sometimes paying higher wages to keep employees happy.
But the topic was discussed during industry tracker STR’s recent conference in Nashville, according to a story by Travel Daily News, and one industry analyst delivered his verdict.
MORE STORIES: Hilton overhauls traditional room service
MORE STORIES: 5 fitness apps to keep you fit on the road
Union hotels spend 28% more than non-union hotels on salaries and wages, and 66% more on taxes and benefits, the Travel Daily News report said, citing the findings of STR Analytics director Carter Wilson. He based his findings an analysis of payroll per occupied room.
“When asked if it is more expensive to run a union hotel compared with a non-union hotel he offered the simple reply, ‘The answer seems to be yes.’
Readers, hoteliers and union officials: Would you like to weigh in on this issue?