We already won this fight—why are we fighting it again?
In the shadow of the 2028 Olympics, Los Angeles finds itself weighing a promise made to its most essential workers against the fiscal pressures of a city already stretched thin. The City Council, having once enshrined a path to $30-an-hour wages for hotel and airport workers, now considers trading that commitment as a bargaining chip to prevent a business coalition from dismantling a key source of municipal revenue. It is an old tension rendered new: the dignity of labor placed on the negotiating table not by adversaries, but by the very officials who once championed it.
- A business coalition gathered enough signatures to threaten a November ballot measure that would eliminate $800 million in annual city tax revenue, forcing the council's hand.
- Council President Marqueece Harris-Dawson introduced an amendment to delay the 'Olympic Salary' wage increases — a move workers and union leaders are calling a betrayal of a hard-won commitment.
- Dozens of hotel and airport workers appeared at City Hall to protest, with some describing thirteen-hour workdays and the impossibility of affording adequate housing on their current wages.
- SEIU-USWW president David Huerta warned that the council was signaling it did not need to honor its own word, demanding that negotiations continue without sacrificing worker gains.
- The council is racing toward a Tuesday deadline, hoping to convince the business coalition to withdraw their ballot measure in exchange for the wage delay — a trade that leaves thousands of workers in limbo.
Los Angeles city officials are reconsidering a wage promise made to thousands of hotel and airport workers — a commitment designed to deliver $30 an hour by the time the 2028 Olympics arrive. The Council president introduced an amendment this week to delay those increases, setting workers and their union against a coalition of business owners threatening to take a separate matter directly to voters in November.
Last year, the city approved the 'Olympic Salary' ordinance, a three-year escalation that would lift hospitality and airport workers' pay in step with the Games: $25 per hour starting this July, $27.50 in 2027, and $30 by 2028. For workers who had fought for it, the ordinance was a concrete victory. Now that victory is in question.
The pressure came from hotel owners and other business interests who gathered signatures to place a ballot measure before November voters — one that would eliminate the city's commercial tax on gross revenues, a tax generating roughly $800 million annually. Rather than fight that measure at the polls, Council President Marqueece Harris-Dawson proposed delaying the wage increases as a negotiating chip, hoping the business coalition would withdraw their proposal in exchange.
When the amendment was discussed, dozens of workers arrived at City Hall to object. Margarita Ramos, a hotel worker, described the council's reversal as a betrayal of its own commitment. Elisa Valencia, who packs food for airlines, spoke of thirteen-hour days and living in a single room because she cannot afford more — essential labor in a city where her pay has not kept pace with its cost.
David Huerta of SEIU-USWW was unsparing: the council, he said, had announced it did not have to keep its word. The debate continues next Tuesday, with the council hoping to reach a deal that keeps the ballot measure off November's ballot — and the wage increases on hold.
Los Angeles city officials are reconsidering a wage promise made to thousands of hotel and airport workers—a commitment that was supposed to deliver $30 an hour by the time the Olympics arrive in 2028. The Council president introduced an amendment this week to delay the increases, a move that has set workers and their union representatives against a coalition of business owners who are threatening to take the matter directly to voters in November.
Last year, the city council approved what it called the "Olympic Salary" ordinance, a three-year wage escalation designed to lift hospitality and airport workers' pay in sync with the Games. The plan was straightforward: $2.50 more per hour each year, starting July of this year at $25, climbing to $27.50 in 2027, and reaching $30 by 2028. It was a concrete victory for workers who had fought for it. Now that victory is being questioned.
The pressure to reverse course came from hotel owners and other business interests who gathered enough signatures to place a ballot measure before voters this November. That measure would eliminate the city's commercial tax on gross business revenues—a tax that city officials say generates roughly $800 million annually. Rather than fight that measure at the ballot box, Council President Marqueece Harris-Dawson proposed delaying the wage increases as a negotiating chip, hoping to convince the business coalition to withdraw their proposal in exchange.
On the morning the amendment was discussed, dozens of workers showed up at City Hall to object. Margarita Ramos, who works in the hotel sector, expressed the betrayal plainly: the council had already won this fight for them, and now the same officials were backing away from their own commitment. Elisa Valencia, who works packing food for airlines at the airport, described the reality of her current wages: thirteen-hour days, living in a single room because she cannot afford anything larger, struggling to survive in a city where her labor is essential but her pay is not.
David Huerta, president of the SEIU-USWW union, was direct about what he saw happening. The council, he said, had just announced it did not have to keep its word. He called for negotiations to continue and for the city to honor what it had promised.
The council's strategy is clear: use the wage delay as leverage to get the business coalition to withdraw the ballot measure. If successful, the city avoids a costly electoral fight and potentially a massive loss of revenue. If unsuccessful, the council will face a November vote that could strip the city of $800 million in annual income. The human cost of that calculation falls on workers who believed the Olympic Salary was settled law. The debate continues next Tuesday, with the council hoping to reach an agreement that keeps the ballot measure off the November election—and keeps the wage increases on hold.
Notable Quotes
It seems very unfair to all the council members because we had already won that fight— Margarita Ramos, hotel worker
The council members just said they don't have to fulfill this obligation— David Huerta, president of SEIU-USWW union
The Hearth Conversation Another angle on the story
Why would a city council move to delay wages they'd already approved? That seems politically risky.
Because a business coalition gathered enough signatures to threaten something worse—a ballot measure that would eliminate the city's commercial tax entirely. That tax brings in $800 million a year. The council is betting they can trade the wage delay for the ballot measure's withdrawal.
So the workers become the bargaining chip in a negotiation they didn't start.
Exactly. The workers won this fight last year. They had a three-year plan locked in. Now they're being asked to wait while the city negotiates with the people who opposed them.
What's the union saying?
They're saying the council needs to keep its word. No delays, no renegotiations. The deal was made.
And the workers themselves?
They're at City Hall making it clear what's at stake. One woman works thirteen-hour days and can only afford a single room. Another says they already won this fight and shouldn't have to fight it again.
Does the council have the votes to delay the wages?
That's what happens next Tuesday. The debate continues, and the council is hoping to reach an agreement with the business coalition before then. If they can't, the ballot measure goes forward in November.