Q: The union has undertaken the struggle with the New Otani Hotel for a number of years now. Why is this effort to unionize hotel workers so important, and what is the new strategy?

A: The New Otani Hotel was the first major hotel built non-union in downtown Los Angeles. They came into this city with the attitude of, we're going to stop the trend towards workers having a voice on the job. [They] kind of declared [that they were] not going to go along with the program of this city. And so, unfortunately, our union, back then, when it was first opened, did not have the vision, the leadership did not have the vision of taking that on. And so it started a trend in the wrong direction. New Otani started a trend towards workers not having union rights and not being part of the union movement. They have been the most difficult. We’re now into our seventh year of our struggle at the New Otani, the workers in their seventh year of struggling at the New Otani for the right to have a union. So, to me, what's important is they’re very entrenched. They wanted to set a new tone, a new direction for companies, [for] hotel corporations in Los Angeles. Unfortunately, to some degree, they did. And so we have to fight that in a way that, obviously, is very very difficult. They’re owned by the second largest construction company in Japan. And this is not a Latino versus Japanese; this is Latino hotel workers versus very very wealthy, powerful corporation. I think it’s important that when a corporation like that takes on the housekeepers and the dishwashers and the cooks, that they not feel they could squash us, that they could stop them, and that there aren't going to be any repercussions to it. That they have slowed us down--it's been very very difficult. But, we're not going to stop until we win that, until they win that fight, and it’s been a message to other companies. That we’re not as powerful as them, but we’re going to go on as long as it takes. And I think it sends a message throughout this city, and think that other employers have seen that they don't want to go down that road. And that doesn't mean that others won't try to do the same thing. They've all tried to do that same thing with us. We have had battles that go on for several years.


Q: What successes have you had?

A: Well, we've had great successes. We had to stop a sort of deterioration when there was new leadership in this union in 1987, 1988. We had to stop a trend of deterioration in our industry as far as the wages, as far as unionization. And build something back up.
I would say the biggest success is that we've changed the lives of so many workers in this industry. They have a right to fight back; they have a right to feel dignity in their job, and transform them into being leaders of a movement versus victims of some powerful company that tries to treat them like garbage. So, I would say that the transformation of individual worker’s lives to become leaders, and taking charge of their lives, and taking charge of the workplace. That’s been the biggest success of our union. That’s what I’m most proud of in terms of what our union has done.
I would say another success is connecting with our community in the biggest way possible. To have church leaders connecting with those workers. Challenging church leaders. Going to their priests and saying “you’ve got to be with me, in my fight.” Going to community organizations, going to politicians, and saying “we’re going to hold you accountable. You need to be with us.” And when they’re not with us, go and fight with them. And so the politicians see a face to what’s wrong out there. They see a face to the poverty. They see a face to the racism. And I think that’s a very powerful thing that’s helping to change this city, overall.
Real specific successes we’ve had, we’ve stopped the trend from downward to growing. [So that] when Staples Arena opens up that they know that they have to be union; it’s not an option. Even though we had a fight about it. It’s not the option like it was when New Otani opened up. So there [are] successes in terms of the livelihood and the level of working conditions and wages so that in a couple of years a housekeeper in a union hotel will be making more than eleven dollars an hour. That’s something that housekeepers, several years ago, couldn’t imagine that they’d be way above what the poverty level was. So, I think that those kinds of things, making our standard higher. For what people assume should be the standard for a dishwasher and a housekeeper. We’ve changed that. And to see Latinos as fighting for themselves and changing the direction of the city. I think those are our greatest successes.


Q: Could you tell us a little bit about the hunger strike at USC?

A: Well, USC, represents far more than a university in South Central Los Angeles. If you look at the board of trustees, it pretty much represents the corporate powers of this city, and in some ways, of the country. From oil to entertainment, and everything else that’s important in the economy of Southern California. When they made the decision that they could deprive 350 food service and cleaners from having some security in their lives, I don't think they figured those workers would be willing to fight for a long time. To really get that security in their lives. As we went through that fight, the workers did a number of things. They went out on strike, they did stoppages, they got punished for going out on strike. For example, after we did a three week strike, the food servers, USC thought they were punishing them, by making them go to clean the dorms in the summertime. Clean toilets and the mess that students leave. They thought they were punishing the food servers, and the food servers were cooks, very proud of their profession. But, instead, the workers came out of it much stronger and said you know what? There's dignity to that work. And that's OK. I can do that work. You’re not going to stop me from fighting for what I believe is important to me and my kids. So a lot of strength came out of it. We went through it for several years by the time we made the decision to do a fast. I saw that a lot of people in the city, a lot of leaders, political leaders, business leaders, were watching it. But they weren’t engaging in it and helping us try to resolve this. I really felt that people had to be pulled in to this. Because if they would let a university like USC deprive 350 workers out of something so simple as some job security, then what would happen in Los Angeles beyond those workers? Leaders had to be pulled in to take a stand and be active about solving the issues of poverty and discrimination in this city. So, we made the decision [to do] the fast as a way of engaging people, and giving them an opportunity to become involved in this struggle.
Originally, it was, a five day fast. And when I decided to extend it, personally, Doloras Huerta was the one who came to visit me and said, look María Elena, one of the things that we did in the Farm Workers, [with] Cesar, one of the fasts that he did, was that, he shouldn’t be the only one doing it. And so that was when the idea came up, that I would get off the fast, but that the fast would continue. And, in that way, it began to give people the opportunity to fight USC in a more personal way, because that’s what the fast is. It was a personal way of fighting. Not just like one of many people? But you, personally, gave of yourself and made a sacrifice, so that you could see you commit yourself to something that was really long.


Q: How many people got involved, and what kind of people?

A: People just came out of the woodwork. Everybody wanted to do it. The teachers in that area around USC would come by with a whole classroom of kids and have the kids bring drawings and letters. So they would pin up letters to president of the university. You know, "I'm Esteban. I go to this school, and I think you should treat the workers better," and so the teachers began to pull their kids into it and also, individually, participated in the fast, and then politicians started doing it, so city counsel people went there. And then our members, the workers, went to Sacramento, so state legislators were doing it. Church people were doing it. The workers themselves, on the campus. So, we had one, for example, Marie Sella who did it for five days, even though she went into work every day. And she was a cook. She was a pantry cook. So she prepared the food for the students, and at the same time she fasted for five days. So it was really all these people. The ACLU and several civil rights organizations did a press conference and took it up for several days.
The Farm Workers Union lent us the cross that Cesar wore on his last fast. And so it was passed on. His granddaughter, Christina, lend it to us. And people, people felt very proud and again, sort of connected to history. Because that Farm Worker cross, Cesar's cross, connected the Farm Worker's Union and Cesar to the USC workers. And then Helen Chávez, Cesar's widow, [dedicated a] plaque that’s on the USC campus [to her husband]. She declared that we would be in mourning. So she had it covered in black, with a black cloak. Until the struggle of the USC workers was resolved. And so, during the struggle and during the fast, we'd go and take flowers to Cesar, and at the end, the last day, when we finally settled it, Jesse Jackson and Dolores [Huerta] came, and they took the black cloak off, and declared the university was worthy of having a plaque to Cesar.