Appeal to Honor Boycott of Westin St. Francis

Dear Colleague,

As you may already know, there is a union boycott of the Westin St. Francis hotel in San Francisco, the site of the Pacific Division meeting of the APA from March 30 through April 4 this year. To briefly review: on January 18 the Secretary-Treasurer of the Pacific Division informed program participants that United Here Local 2, which represents the hotel workers in San Francisco, had called for a boycott of the Westin, along with a number of other major hotels in the city, because of an unresolved contract dispute. Program participants were asked to vote by email to determine whether the site of the convention should be moved. By a narrow majority the vote was to stay at the Westin, with provision being made for those who want to honor the boycott by moving their sessions offsite. It now appears that the University of San Francisco will be hosting the offsite sessions.

We feel strongly that the decision to keep the convention at the Westin, while democratically legitimate, was nonetheless morally wrong. However, we are not trying to reverse that decision now. Rather, we are writing to urge you to sign a pledge to personally honor the union boycott and to urge others to honor it. Since the union is asking that no one вeat, sleep, or meetв in the hotel until an agreement is reached, we are asking you to pledge not to set foot in the hotel during the convention as long as the boycott remains in force.

In our conversations with other APA members, we have heard a number of arguments against the view that we have a duty to honor the boycott. Weвd like to address them.

1. Some people are under the impression that the dispute between the union and the hotel management is limited to a small and inconsequential matter. Although the hotel management is representing the situation in this way, the hotel workers tell a different story. Here is an excerpt from an email message to a number of APA members from Connie Hibbard, Unite Here Local 2:

вMy co-workers and I are currently in the midst of a dispute with Starwood Hotels, the company that manages the Westin St. Francis. The company is insisting on proposals that would make health benefits unaffordable for myself and my family, cut workersв retirement benefits, and increase workloads. This is despite the fact Starwood made $180 million in profits during just nine months last year, and the Westin St. Francis hotel itself generated over $11 million in earnings. My co-workers and I went on a 3-day strike in November to show that we will not let Starwood, whose CEO made $4.8 million in 2008, use the economy as an excuse to squeeze us even harder. We are calling on all Westin St. Francis customers to BOYCOTT the hotel until it agrees to a fair contract. I understand the APA is taking input on whether or not to hold its conference at this hotel. Unfortunately, the information the APA sent its members was false and misleading on several counts. For example, the APA said that вthere is no dispute over salaries or working conditionsв and that вthe parties do not appear to be far apart.в This simply isnвt true. The issues at stake in negotiations include wages, working conditions, workersв right to join unions, and affordable healthcare.

And hereвs a quote from Riddhi Mehta, taken from TV coverage of a picket of one of the boycotted hotels:

"They want our members to pay $200 a month for health care over a period of three years, and they can't afford that. They make $30,000 a year and they cannot afford that."

2. Some people claim to see a morally significant difference between a boycott and a strike; they say that they would never violate a strike or cross a picket line, but that they do not feel the same obligation to honor a boycott. We simply do not understand this reasoning. Strikes and boycotts are tactical devices used by unions to attempt to offset the built-in bargaining advantage naturally possessed by management, especially large corporations. Both are effective and concrete means of promoting basic human rights for working people who deserve to live decent lives. Unions waging contract struggles need to be smart about how they expend their resources and so must think strategically in choosing their tactics. We do not see how their choice changes the moral valence. The justification for honoring a boycott is therefore continuous with - and as strong as - the justification for honoring a strike. Moreover, the costs to APA members of implementing the boycott are marginal compared to what workers stand to gain.

We note, too, in passing, that contrary to what APA members were told, the hotel workers have been engaged in picketing, as evidenced by the television story cited above. Hereвs Connie Hibbard again:

в[T]he APA said, вThere are no pickets, though union staff may distribute leaflets at the hotel doorsв. Local 2 members have held multiple picket lines outside the St. Francis. I myself participated in a lively picket line just a few days ago, along with 150 coworkers, in front of the hotel. Starwood is trying to spread the idea that itвs just a few вunion staffв at our actions в but APA members shouldnвt buy into this line. You can get a glimpse into our struggle through a video thatвs posted on our unionвs website, www.unitehere2.org.в

3. Finally, some people have cited the concessions and sacrifices we are all being asked to make in these current, difficult economic conditions: if we are accepting pay cuts, furloughs, higher work loads and increased health care premiums, why shouldnвt the hotel workers also have to make concessions?

We have a great deal to say in response to this argument. First of all, there are at least three factors that make the hotel workersв situation importantly different from our own. First, unlike the hotel workers, we are employed by not-for-profit institutions; savings squeezed from us are not going directly to profits. Second, the financial crisis in higher education, especially in public institutions, is real, whereas the hotel group targeted by the workers has posted healthy profits over the last year - for the Westin, $11 million over just nine months. This hotel group can afford a decent deal for their workers, and is crying poverty merely as pretext. Third, size matters. Although we recognize the precarious position of our un- and under-employed colleagues, we wish to call on the consciences of those members who have secure employment and comparatively generous salaries to act in support of workers struggling for a decent life at the economic margins of society.

Second, the argument incorrectly assumes that college professors ought in all cases to accept the concessions being demanded of them. But as the recent protests in California attest, many of us are actively fighting wage cuts, givebacks, and hikes in student fees, particularly when our employers privilege administratorsв compensation over staff retention, faculty recruitment, and student financial aid, or when state governments try to shift the cost of running a public resource onto the backs of faculty, staff, and students.

We hope you have found our case for honoring the boycott convincing and agree to sign the on-line pledge we have created. Once signatures have been collected, the statement will be sent to the Westin Hotel and to the Union. The Union may choose to post the statement and accompanying signatures on their web page.

Sincerely,

Louise Antony (University of Massachusetts в Amherst)
Joseph Levine (University of Massachusetts в Amherst)
Mohammed Abed (California State University в Los Angeles)


*********************************************************************

TEXT OF PLEDGE:

We, the undersigned, pledge to honor the boycott against the Westin St. Francis hotel in San Francisco during the APA Pacific Division Meeting this spring, and will not eat, sleep, or meet in the hotel. We also urge other philosophers to honor the boycott.