Post by High Priestess on Sept 27, 2015 1:11:37 GMT
Peter shared this:
Hotel workers in D.C. propose some of the strictest Airbnb regulations in the country
"One bill, backed by a large hotel workers union, would ban the rental of whole units without the owner or occupant being present, and prevent hosts from renting out more than one unit at a time. It would also create a special enforcement division within the District’s Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs to conduct inspections, and empower third parties — such as neighborhood groups or housing affordability advocates — to sue for violations.
For Unite-Here Local 25, which represents 6,500 hotel workers in the D.C. area, Airbnb poses a threat to hotels’ profitability — and therefore jobs. But the local’s leader, John Boardman, said the bill is also aimed at stopping people from cannibalizing apartments that might otherwise be occupied by long-term tenants."
Click wapo.st/1Vi4N9R for Washington Post article.
Peter's two cents: The anti-home sharing Prop. F in San Francisco is also backed by the hotel workers union. What I've always found puzzling is the fact that hotel workers (or their unions) are adamantly against home sharing but hotel owners, by and large, are not. If hotels, which are generally very profitable in the SF and DC markets at least, are not worried about losing market share to home sharing, why are their employees' unions wielding pitch-forks in public squares?
Thought: If hotel workers unions make the claim that hosts are running illegal hotels, we hosts should all apply to be members of the union and lobby for the union's leaders to advocate to preserve our jobs.
Keith:
The unions should be trying to get more of the hotels profits I to wages for their employees rather then protecting thir monopoly which ultimately leads to wage reductions.
Hotel workers in D.C. propose some of the strictest Airbnb regulations in the country
"One bill, backed by a large hotel workers union, would ban the rental of whole units without the owner or occupant being present, and prevent hosts from renting out more than one unit at a time. It would also create a special enforcement division within the District’s Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs to conduct inspections, and empower third parties — such as neighborhood groups or housing affordability advocates — to sue for violations.
For Unite-Here Local 25, which represents 6,500 hotel workers in the D.C. area, Airbnb poses a threat to hotels’ profitability — and therefore jobs. But the local’s leader, John Boardman, said the bill is also aimed at stopping people from cannibalizing apartments that might otherwise be occupied by long-term tenants."
Click wapo.st/1Vi4N9R for Washington Post article.
Peter's two cents: The anti-home sharing Prop. F in San Francisco is also backed by the hotel workers union. What I've always found puzzling is the fact that hotel workers (or their unions) are adamantly against home sharing but hotel owners, by and large, are not. If hotels, which are generally very profitable in the SF and DC markets at least, are not worried about losing market share to home sharing, why are their employees' unions wielding pitch-forks in public squares?
Thought: If hotel workers unions make the claim that hosts are running illegal hotels, we hosts should all apply to be members of the union and lobby for the union's leaders to advocate to preserve our jobs.
Keith:
The unions should be trying to get more of the hotels profits I to wages for their employees rather then protecting thir monopoly which ultimately leads to wage reductions.