The 9% wage increase announced by the Hotel and Extrahotel Association of Tenerife, La Palma, La Gomera, and El Hierro (Ashotel) aims to ensure “social peace” after the 20A, but will only be implemented if the unions withdraw a complaint that has been on the table for over a year regarding irregularities in the collective agreement. There are only three days left – next July 9 – for the hotel association to face the start of the trial for this lawsuit brought by UGT and CCOO, which, if ruled in favour of the unions, could mean an “astronomical” expense for the hospitality sector establishments in Santa Cruz de Tenerife.
This Friday, the president of the association, Jorge Marichal, pledged in a press conference to “double” the planned salary increase for this year and next year (2024-2025) in the sector’s agreement – set at 4.5% – to reach a “more than considerable” 9% increase.
The president of Ashotel linked this commitment to the massive protests against the tourist model on April 20, pointing out that it is a way to calm the waters. “We are not deaf or oblivious to the 20A, and that is why we are here today making this proposal, which adds to other initiatives already underway,” highlighted Marichal.
What he did not explain or even mention is that for over a year, the Hospitality sector in the province has been under scrutiny with a complaint against the collective agreement filed by CCOO and UGT that could cost the sector millions for having “discriminated” against a portion of its workers since 1995.
“The association wanted to take credit for social responsibility by linking its proposal to the 20A when this is due to a contingency arising from a collective conflict,” emphasised Francisco González, Deputy General Secretary and Labour Policy of UGT, who added: “They want to play the hero of the story as if the script were not written.” His words are supported by the General Secretary of the CCOO Services Federation, Borja Suárez, who denounces that Marichal is “lying to society” and trying to “use” the unions as “accomplices”.
A “botched” agreement
[–>
The reason for the lawsuit is a “botched” agreement that sought to freeze the seniority supplement, but it continued to be “dynamic”. That is, it has varied according to salary increases over all these years, but only for people who had it in their payroll before that date. “Those who negotiated at that time agreed to freeze it, but they did it in that way,” argues González, who insists that “the Supreme Court has ruled that as it is dynamic, it must be paid to everyone”.
If the unions are successful, companies in the province’s sector would face a “million-pound conflict”, as they would be obliged to pay the arrears to all staff who have been working for more than six months. “Some people have calculated they are owed 7,000 Euros, in other cases the amount reaches 20,000,” highlights González, who already warns that “there will be a lot of workers” resorting to legal action. UGT estimates that we could be talking about over 30 million Euros.
The trial will begin next Tuesday, July 9, and the unions have warned that they will not back down against the association that has made its commitment conditional on them withdrawing the lawsuit. “The proposal is on the table, and we now trust that with the same loyalty that we have negotiated, they act for a common goal: the social and labour peace that has always prevailed in our sector,” pointed out Marichal, who indicated that the issue they are fighting for – seniority – was resolved 15 years ago.
However, both CCOO and UGT have concurred, and have informed this newspaper in advance, that they will not withdraw the complaint. “If there is no substantial salary increase proposal, we will not remove it,” states González. His words are confirmed by Suárez: “We will not withdraw the lawsuit, especially with these practices”
When they started negotiating, the initial purpose of the unions was indeed to withdraw the complaint, but only if they reached an agreement. This way they would achieve immediate effects and for all workers. “It must be taken into account that the resolution of a trial like this can take between 2 or 3 years if it reaches the Supreme Court,” recalls González.
The unions have been negotiating a salary increase for the past four months precisely to avoid ending up in court. However, having not even reached a tentative agreement, they have decided to move forward. In fact, as Suárez asserts, this latest proposal from Ashotel has not even reached the negotiating table, despite Marichal’s statements.
The proposals from both trade union forces are different but are based on the same premise: to achieve a salary increase that employees will feel in their pockets at the end of the month. CCOO, in this regard, has presented three proposals to the association – none of which has received a response –, with the union’s top priority being to achieve a salary increase that brings Santa Cruz de Tenerife employees’ conditions closer to those in Las Palmas de Gran Canaria. After all, it is estimated that the salaries in the eastern province are between 15% and 18% higher than those offered in Santa Cruz de Tenerife.
The Secretary-General of the Federation of Services of CCOO considers Ashotel’s proposal inadequate. “The employers’ proposal is a mere tip,” he emphasises. In his view, it does not meet the needs of the workers in the province, “many of whom struggle with housing access or affording basic goods.” Suárez explains that since a 4.5% increase has already been set by the current agreement, Ashotel’s promise would only mean an additional 4.5% rise. In other words, “about €50 more for a salary of €1,300,” as Suárez points out.
UGT is more willing to accept a 9% salary increase, but insists that it cannot be the sole improvement and labels Ashotel’s proposal as “deceptive.” UGT also advocates for enhancing travel benefits to at least match those of workers in Las Palmas de Gran Canaria. “In Santa Cruz de Tenerife, we have 48 days of leave with a holiday fund of €300, while in Las Palmas, there are 48 days of leave with a holiday fund of €1,440,” González points out.
Neither CCOO nor UGT dare to provide an estimation regarding the potential court ruling, but they do not rule out the possibility that the legal experts will rule in their favour. “The trial will begin on Tuesday and if it is successful, it will be a significant improvement for those who have been working in the hospitality industry for over six months,” Suárez indicates.
All this commotion in the sector is happening while social groups are gearing up to resume protests on the streets. This was announced by Canarias tiene un límite on its social media, indicating their intention for the protests to take place in tourist areas, although a specific date has not yet been confirmed.
