Anchorage Hilton workers are asking you to honor their boycott and to not eat, sleep or meet at the hotel
- The Collective Bargaining Agreement with Hotel owner Columbia Sussex expired in July 2008. As of February 2023, no new agreement has been reached. Workers have been fighting for affordable family medical insurance, safe workloads, job security, and regular wage increases.
- Workers called for a boycott in July 2009. They have been asking customers not to utilize the hotel during the labor dispute.
- Both Atlas Airlines and Holland America moved “major” accounts out of the hotel, according to a 2017 report by Kroll Bond Rating Agency. Kroll does not say why the customers moved.
- In 2014, the Hotel cut workers off from an affordable union health insurance plan.
- Two Hilton Anchorage customers—the Veterinary Cancer Society and the Alaska SHRM State Council—were compelled to provide evidence in a lawsuit that Hilton Anchorage filed in 2018 against the Union falsely alleging that its boycott violated federal labor law. While the court ultimately threw the lawsuit out as baseless, that was not before the two organizations had to respond to an extensive document subpoena and their representatives were compelled to sit for depositions under oath! You can read the decision by the United States District Court for the District of Alaska throwing out Hilton Anchorage’s lawsuit here. You can read the decision of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirming the decision here.
HILTON ANCHORAGE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICE HISTORY BEFORE THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD (NLRB) | |
ULP Case No.
(Closed in ital) |
Description of charge/Summary of result or status |
19-CA-031875,
19-CA-031925, 19-CA-032123, 19-CA-032124, 19-CA-032120 |
Date Filed: April 20, 2009. Allegations: Removal of tip jar from cashiers area, lay-off of Raymond Ortiz, assignment of bargaining unit work to non-bargaining unit members (specifically office clerk work, room service work, line cook work, Sous Chef work, and bakers work, lost and found), interference with leafleting, threats of arrest for protected union activities in public areas outside the hotel, changing room attendant schedules to interfere with union rally, interference with union hosted lunch, removal of union flyers from bulletin board.
Merit determination* found by Region 19; settlement agreement entered. *Note: A “merit determination” is a finding by the NLRB’s General Counsel after investigation that an unfair labor practice charge has potential merit and a complaint should issue. At this stage, some parties accused of ULPs settle the allegations. If no settlement is reached, the complaint is then heard before an administrative law judge for a tentative ruling that is then reviewed by the NLRB. NLRB decisions can be appealed to the federal courts of appeal. |
19-CA-193656,
19-CA-193659 |
Date Filed: February 22, 2017. Allegations: Surveillance, including management inserting themselves in break room to surveil union visits; failure to provide the Union with requested information about bussers’ schedules, time cards and payroll records.
ALJ decision issued on 3/4/20. Union prevailed on almost all charges, except the break room surveillance allegation. Decision issued by the Board on 2/10/21, affirming the ALJ. Board’s decision affirmed by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals on July 29, 2022. |
19-CA-203675 | Date Filed: August 1, 2017. Allegation: Barring Union interns from accessing bargaining unit members on hotel property.
ALJ decision issued on 3/4/20; the Union prevailed. Decision issued by the Board on 2/10/21, affirming the ALJ. Board’s decision affirmed by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals on July 29, 2022. |
19-CA-212923 | Date Filed: January 8, 2018. Allegations: Failing to provide information requested on August 22, 2017, pertaining to Hotel’s claim that bargaining unit members complained to the General Manager about the Union, and further violation of the settlement agreement in Case Nos. 19-CA-193656 and 19-CA-193659.
ALJ decision issued on 3/4/20; the Union prevailed. Decision issued by the Board on 2/10/21, affirming the ALJ. Board’s decision affirmed by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals on July 29, 2022. |
19-CA-212950 | Date Filed: January 10, 2018. Allegations: Failing/refusing to bargain in good faith for a successor CBA, including: failing to make counter-proposals, ceasing negotiations, refusing future bargaining, unilaterally implementing its restricted terms of access for the Union, and breaching the Settlement Agreement in Case Nos. 19-CA-193656 and 19-CA-193659.
ALJ decision issued on 3/4/20; the Union prevailed. Decision issued by the Board on 2/10/21, affirming the ALJ. Board’s decision affirmed by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals on July 29, 2022. |
19-CA-218585, 19-CA-218613 | Date Filed: April 16, 2018. Allegations: Hotel filed a retaliatory, frivolous, and objectively baseless federally-preempted lawsuit in federal court against the Union, seeking to retaliate against the Union, its members, and employees represented by the Union for their efforts to engage in collective bargaining with the Employer, and to attain lawful access to the premises of the Hotel for representational purposes, and for their filing and pursuit of ULPs in support of those efforts.
On July 26, 2022, the U.S. Court of Appeal for the Ninth Circuit dismissed Hilton’s appeal of the U.S. District Court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of the Defendants UNITE HERE and UNITE HERE Local 878. The Region has indicated that it has found merit to the unfair labor practice charge and will proceed to complaint absent settlement. |
19-CA-218647 | Date Filed: April 17, 2018. Allegation: The Hilton unlawfully sought to prevent and penalize Section 7-protected activity, and engaged in conduct inherently destructive of Section 7 rights, by contacting the Anchorage Police Department and seeking to enlist the police to assist it in preventing union agents from entering the hotel’s premises in order to speak to union-represented hotel employees.
ALJ decision issued on 3/4/20; the Union prevailed. Exceptions and Cross Exceptions filed in April 2020. Decision issued by the Board on 2/10/21, affirming the ALJ. Board’s decision affirmed by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals on July 29, 2022. |
19-CA-228578 | Date Filed: October 3, 2018. Allegations: The Hotel posted a notice to employees, attempting to bypass the Union as the employees’ duly-elected representative, and invited employees to deal with management directly over mandatory issues of bargaining such as wages, benefits, and conditions of employment. The employer, through the notice, sought to diminish the Union’s, role in the collective bargaining process, in violation of the Act.
ALJ decision issued on 3/4/20; the Union prevailed. Decision issued by the Board on 2/10/21, affirming the ALJ. Board’s decision affirmed by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals on July 29, 2022. |
19-CA-241411 | Date Filed: May 10, 2019. Allegations: The Hotel changed its housekeepers’ duties by requiring them to spend more time per room while still meeting the same room-cleaning quota. The Hotel then threatened employees with discipline for failing to meet cleaning quotas. The Union asked for information about renovations, changes to showers from tubs to walk-ins, and tools expected to be used for cleaning—which the Hotel has refused to provide.
ALJ issued decision on 3/11/21; the Union prevailed. Decision issued by the Board on 9/29/2022; follow-up decision issued by the Board on January 27, 2023, denying the Hotel’s motion for reconsideration. The Hotel has appealed to U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. |
19-CA-249615, 19-CA-249617
|
Date Filed: October 7, 2019. Allegations: Discriminatory termination for union activity. Two workers (Yolanda Belen, Yolimar Berrocales) terminated after union helped them with a sexual harassment complaint. Merit determination found by Region 19, and complaint issued. Settlement agreement entered and case closed by Region. |
19- CA-258916 | Date Filed: April 8, 2020. Allegation: The Hotel laid off door and bell staff, cook, engineer, and reduced or altered hours of work assigned to laundry personnel, without providing the union with notice or opportunity to bargain. Includes allegation of assigning bargaining unit work to non-unit employees.
Charge dismissed by the region. Appeal of dismissal rejected. |
19-CA-257263 | Date Filed: February 27, 2020. Allegations: Failure to furnish information related to mold. Merit determination found by Region 19; settlement agreement entered and closed by Region. |
19-CA-260305 | Date Filed: May 11, 2020. Allegation: Hotel failed to supply information regarding discipline, suspension, and discharge of worker. .
Charge settled and closed by region on March 4, 2021. |
19-CA-274250 | Date Filed: March 17, 2021. Allegation: Hotel unilaterally assigned front desk work to managers without bargaining in good faith.
Charge dismissed by the region. Appeal of dismissal rejected. |
19-CA-295398 | Date Filed: May 6, 2022. Allegation: Hotel unilaterally implemented new hire and referral bonuses without bargaining in good faith.
The Hotel quickly backed down and withdraw the planned new-hire bonus, while the Union chose to permit the Hotel to move forward with the planned referral bonus. Union’s subsequent request to withdraw the charge approved by the region on 6/1/22. |
19-CA-280269 | Date Filed: July 7, 2021. Allegation: Hotel unilaterally utilized temporary workers without notification and bargaining with union, and failed to provide relevant information regarding temporary workers. Region dismissed the allegation regarding failure to notify and bargain, but found merit to allegation of failure to provide information. Appeal of dismissal of bargaining allegation rejected. Settlement agreement reached on the failure to provide information allegation, and case settled in October 2022. Case still open on compliance. |
When arranging accommodations or booking an event at a hotel in Anchorage, please ensure that it is protected from the effects of a labor dispute. Strikes, boycotts and picket lines can often be noisy and disruptive. To avoid these potential complications, please consider staying at a union hotel that is NOT at risk for a labor dispute.
For help with relocation, please contact 202-661-3680 or [email protected].
The following Columbia Sussex Properties are also under boycott:
- Doubletree Cincinnati Airport, Hebron, KY
- Hampton Inn Anchorage, Anchorage, AK
- Hilton Anchorage, Anchorage, AK
- Hilton Clearwater Beach Resort and Spa, Clearwater Beach, FL
- Hilton Garden Inn Anchorage, Anchorage, AK
- Homewood Suites Anchorage, Anchorage, AK
- Hyatt Regency Indianapolis, Indianapolis, IN
- Marriott Albany, Albany, NY
- Marriott Albuquerque, Albuquerque, NM
- Marriott Anchorage Downtown Anchorage, AK
- Marriott Birmingham, Birmingham, AL
- Marriott Chicago O’Hare, Chicago, IL
- Marriott Cincinnati Airport Herbon, KY
- Marriott Cincinnati North West, Chester, OH
- Marriott Cincinnati Northeast, Mason, OH
- Marriott Columbia Columbia, SC
- Marriott Columbus Northwest, Dublin, OH
- Marriott Dallas Las Colinas, Irving, TX
- Marriott DFW Airport South Fort Worth, TX
- Marriott East Lansing University Place, East Laning, MI
- Marriott El Paso, El Paso, TX
- Marriott Greensboro Downtown, Greensboro, NC
- Marriott Hartford Windsor Airport, Windsor, CT
- Marriott Hilton Head Resort and Spa Hilton Head Island, SC
- Marriott Indianapolis North, Indianapolis, IN
- Marriott Jacksonville, Jacksonville, FL
- Marriott Melville Long Island, Melville, NY
- Marriott Minneapolis Airport, Bloomington, MN
- Marriott Myrtle Beach Resort at Grande Dunes, Myrtle Beach, SC
- Marriott Orlando Airport Lakeside, Orlando, FL
- Marriott Philadelphia West, West Conshohocken, PA
- Marriott Sanibel Harbour Resort & Spa Fort Myers, FL
- Marriott Savannah Riverfront ,Savannah, GA
- Marriott Tampa Westshore, Tampa, FL
- Renaissance Concourse Atlanta Airport Hotel, Atlanta, GA
- Renaissance Cincinnati Downtown Hotel, Cincinnati, OH
- Renaissance Dallas Addison, Addison, TX
- Sirata Beach Resort, St Pete Beach, FL
- Westin Atlanta Airport, Atlanta, GA