Exploitation of workers at top hotels

scorza · 30 Jul 2009 at 22:19

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/8171318.stm

Interesting article on the BBC, it's a bit of an elephant in the room that low paid workers get treated appallingly but it's also rare to hear about specific allegations of worker abuse and law breaking by employers.

In one secretly recorded conversation during registration for a job, the reporter is told by a Hotelcare representative she will be paid the minimum wage. However, there is a catch:

"You'll get £5.73 per hour," she is told. "But you have to clean two and a half rooms per hour. If you don't, you don't get that."

The reporter asks, "So if I clean less than two and a half rooms I receive less money?"

The Hotelcare representative's response is a nod of the head.

Unfortunately for Hotelcare that is illegal, the minimum wage is the minimum wage - you can't simply say you only get the minimum allowed by law if you meet our stupidly high productivity expectations. I actually hope senior HR managers at this company go to prison over this, it's the only way industry will learn. Sadly I think what will actually happen is some middle-manager will end up carrying the can even though their contribution was minimal. Same as it ever was.

For anyone staying at Park Plaza hotels, who contracted Hotelcare, you might want to read this too: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/8171324.stm

starfighter · 30 Jul 2009 at 22:21

Sounds bad but the system has kind of worked, clean 2 rooms an hour or go away, is fair enough, they should go and get a different job if others are so easy.

Paying less than minimum wage is not on and supprisingly they didn't get away with it.

shauncr91 · 30 Jul 2009 at 22:25

Surprised this hasn't been sorted already, would have thought so since it's such a big issue

memaw · 30 Jul 2009 at 23:04

yup, it is the old story, but while they are getting the crap end of the stick, they takje the job on and know the coditions they are expected to work under

shauncr91 · 30 Jul 2009 at 23:13

memaw said:
yup, it is the old story, but while they are getting the crap end of the stick, they takje the job on and know the coditions they are expected to work under

That's not the point.

aproctor · 31 Jul 2009 at 00:29

I don't agree with the minimum wage, but if there is one it should be followed.

Minimum wages raise costs, so the cost of things rises to reflect peoples incomes and the cost to produce it, if you are below the minimum wage where one is in place it only magnifies the problem.

scorza · 31 Jul 2009 at 10:51

It's interesting that it's "hard-working" Poles who are complaining about the way they're being treated and not "lazy" Brits. The article even has a quote from someone (Hotelcare?) admitting that they'd never get a British person to put up with this crap, and to be fair, who would put up with being treated like that when they could stay at home on benefits.

If we are to get the long-term unemployed off benefits and into work then businesses must treat their employees fairly. It's no good papering over the cracks with naive immigrants who aren't used to unscrupulous Anglo-saxon business practices, we need a workplace revolution for the low paid, where everyone is treated fairly and with respect.

Greebo · 31 Jul 2009 at 11:10

aproctor said:
I don't agree with the minimum wage, but if there is one it should be followed.

Minimum wages raise costs, so the cost of things rises to reflect peoples incomes and the cost to produce it, if you are below the minimum wage where one is in place it only magnifies the problem.

It would raise the cost of a room by very much though. Say they do only 2 rooms per hour instead of the required 2.5 but got paid the minimum wage. It would only make the cleaning cost an extra 58p plus NI so say 66p. Hardly noticable for a £150 per night room.

geekyEd · 31 Jul 2009 at 11:18

Greebo said:
It would raise the cost of a room by very much though. Say they do only 2 rooms per hour instead of the required 2.5 but got paid the minimum wage. It would only make the cleaning cost an extra 58p plus NI so say 66p. Hardly noticable for a £150 per night room.

now multiply that by the 30,000 rooms / ammount of rooms completed you say 2 so 15,000 x 66p x 365 days .........

3.6 million pounds a year saving I get

sorry your calculation is per room, dont know where my /2 came from.

meaning 7.2+ million a year.

Greebo · 31 Jul 2009 at 11:22

BluZiff said:
now multiply that by the 30,000 rooms / ammount of rooms completed you say 2 so 15,000 x 66p x 365 days .........

I'm not saying that it doesn't make the cleaning company a lot of money, just pointing out that if they paid the minimum wage and charged the hotel the extra 66p and the hotel then had to charge £151 per night, it wouldn;t be the end of the world.

EDIT: Just looked them up. Hotelcare made £1.5m profit last year and the three shareholders paid themselves a total of £1m in dividends on top of their £500,000 salary.

In fact, the average profit per employee is £789 per annum so if they did pay them the minimum wage, the company would be making a loss.

geekyEd · 31 Jul 2009 at 11:28

yes but then they would have no way to ensure the speed at which the job is being done, thus they could lose out further because of this.

Maybe weekly targets with small rewards from the employer, but its still going to increase the cost for the end user as you have pointed out.

Greebo · 31 Jul 2009 at 12:17

BluZiff said:
yes but then they would have no way to ensure the speed at which the job is being done, thus they could lose out further because of this.

Maybe weekly targets with small rewards from the employer, but its still going to increase the cost for the end user as you have pointed out.

I give up. Why can't people have targets and if they don't meet them, they get disciplined/sacked? That's how it works in 99% of businesses.

We allocate time for jobs at our workplace. If a man doesn't hit those targets he looses his job eventually. Simple.

If I wasn't doing my job properly then i wouldn't still be here after 7 years.

Vulcan · 31 Jul 2009 at 21:33

starfighter said:
Sounds bad but the system has kind of worked, clean 2 rooms an hour or go away, is fair enough, they should go and get a different job if others are so easy.

Did you actually watch the video? It showed that the targets were unrealistic and the rooms weren't being cleaned properly because of that.

decmatt · 31 Jul 2009 at 21:37

A mid-manager will be given the scapegoat here, will stop for a while then continue.... Its a vicous circle. The minimum wage is there for a reason, and companys should be fined heavily if they do not abide by it.

Greebo · 31 Jul 2009 at 22:02

Solac said:
A mid-manager will be given the scapegoat here, will stop for a while then continue.... Its a vicous circle. The minimum wage is there for a reason, and companys should be fined heavily if they do not abide by it.

Totally agree. They should fine the three directors £2m each which is what they have made over the last few years out of paying less than the minimum wage.

Fossil · 1 Aug 2009 at 01:51

What I don't understand is how little the high end hotel companies pay their workers, but can charge eye watering amounts for a room per night.
Do they have huge variable costs, rents, etc?

Same can be said for the expensive restaurants too.. :confused:

D D Danneh · 1 Aug 2009 at 02:24

BluZiff said:
now multiply that by the 30,000 rooms / ammount of rooms completed you say 2 so 15,000 x 66p x 365 days .........

3.6 million pounds a year saving I get

sorry your calculation is per room, dont know where my /2 came from.

meaning 7.2+ million a year.

Yeah, it's a lot of money overall, but if you raised the room price by that extra £1, I doubt anybody would be bothered about spending £151 per night instead of £150, especially if the rooms were cleaner.

Unfortunately, it's hard to measure how well someone is working, especially on a scale like this, where you'd have lots of cleaners. If you use targets, someone could easily half-arse a job. You could use quality control, but that costs money, and really? Quality control on a hotel room?

Dolph · 1 Aug 2009 at 08:06

Pretty shocking behaviour from the contractor, hopefully the BBC expose will get the company honouring the workers rights correctly.

HEADRAT · 1 Aug 2009 at 08:14

What about the exploitation of workers, many of them children, that feed our high street with cheap clothes?

I find that more disgraceful to be honest, our need for a "bargain" means people have to work in terrible conditions for terrible wages.

While the OP story isn't great it's not on the magnitude of the clothing trade.

D.P. · 1 Aug 2009 at 09:02

HEADRAT said:
What about the exploitation of workers, many of them children, that feed our high street with cheap clothes?

I find that more disgraceful to be honest, our need for a "bargain" means people have to work in terrible conditions for terrible wages.

While the OP story isn't great it's not on the magnitude of the clothing trade.

Indeed, the sweatshop industry is in full swing producing cheap tat to fill the shelves of Asda.