3 ms·

This is not a junk fee, it's a junk law. Stupid in, stupid out.

blamazon 4y ago
What's stupid about the law? Do you perhaps have experience in hospitality in the LA area and/or can help illuminate the situation for us, so as to try to persuade us of your opinion? Here's a summary of the ordinance for anyone who's not familiar: https://wagesla.lacity.org/sites/g/files/wph1941/files/2022-08/Hotel%20Worker%20Protection%20Ordinance%20Official%20Notice%20ENG.pdf https://wagesla.lacity.org/sites/g/files/wph1941/files/2022-... And what I think is the full text: https://wagesla.lacity.org/sites/g/files/wph1941/files/2022-08/Hotel%20Worker%20Protection%20Ordinance%20Rules%20and%20Regulations_0.pdf https://wagesla.lacity.org/sites/g/files/wph1941/files/2022-... Doesn't seem that stupid to me as a layperson, reading through it. I'm curious what you see at issue here. There's even a one-year waiver available for financial hardship, and it appears some or all of the protections could be waived under a collective bargaining agreement.
- CamperBob2 4y ago
  The correct question isn't "What's stupid about this law," it's "What's necessary about this law?" Failure to ask this question is how you end up with idiotic, counterproductive Proposition 65 warnings all over everything in sight.
  - blamazon 4y ago
    A bit of online research suggests that hotel staff that were sexually harassed/assaulted at work and subsequently not taken seriously by their management, or not allowed to file a police report on 'company time', were primary originators of the push for this ordinance. The rest of the law focuses on things like: any work over 10 hours in one day is voluntary. Hmm, I wonder why that is necessary?
josephcsible 4y ago
Sure, the law is stupid, but that doesn't make the fee okay. Complying with laws, even stupid ones, is a cost of doing business.
- anon291 4y ago
  Taxes are typically never put in a list price in California.
  - soganess 4y ago
    It doesn't seem like a tax. You wouldn't call a state government requiring a car to meet some minimum safety requirement a tax, right? At least to the best of my knowledge, no automaker has ever done an "airbag tax". It's just a political ploy to garner some ill will against regulators and make a few bucks in the process. Seems pretty genius (in a nefarious way) to me.
    - blamazon 4y ago
      If you look into it the primary intent of the ordinance is to ensure hotel workers can get help fast if they are assaulted in the course of their job, and the secondary intent is to prevent them from being overworked without consent. Which makes this ploy especially distasteful in my eyes - bit of a "the city made us make your servants feel safe and valued at work" fee.
- exabrial 4y ago
  Better said: Covering the cost of stupid laws with stupid fees is a cost of business.

What's stupid about the law? Do you perhaps have experience in hospitality in the LA area and/or can help illuminate the situation for us, so as to try to persuade us of your opinion? Here's a summary of the ordinance for anyone who's not familiar: https://wagesla.lacity.org/sites/g/files/wph1941/files/2022-08/Hotel%20Worker%20Protection%20Ordinance%20Official%20Notice%20ENG.pdf https://wagesla.lacity.org/sites/g/files/wph1941/files/2022-... And what I think is the full text: https://wagesla.lacity.org/sites/g/files/wph1941/files/2022-08/Hotel%20Worker%20Protection%20Ordinance%20Rules%20and%20Regulations_0.pdf https://wagesla.lacity.org/sites/g/files/wph1941/files/2022-... Doesn't seem that stupid to me as a layperson, reading through it. I'm curious what you see at issue here. There's even a one-year waiver available for financial hardship, and it appears some or all of the protections could be waived under a collective bargaining agreement.

CamperBob2 4y ago
The correct question isn't "What's stupid about this law," it's "What's necessary about this law?" Failure to ask this question is how you end up with idiotic, counterproductive Proposition 65 warnings all over everything in sight.
- blamazon 4y ago
  A bit of online research suggests that hotel staff that were sexually harassed/assaulted at work and subsequently not taken seriously by their management, or not allowed to file a police report on 'company time', were primary originators of the push for this ordinance. The rest of the law focuses on things like: any work over 10 hours in one day is voluntary. Hmm, I wonder why that is necessary?

josephcsible 4y ago

Sure, the law is stupid, but that doesn't make the fee okay. Complying with laws, even stupid ones, is a cost of doing business.

anon291 4y ago
Taxes are typically never put in a list price in California.
- soganess 4y ago
  It doesn't seem like a tax. You wouldn't call a state government requiring a car to meet some minimum safety requirement a tax, right? At least to the best of my knowledge, no automaker has ever done an "airbag tax". It's just a political ploy to garner some ill will against regulators and make a few bucks in the process. Seems pretty genius (in a nefarious way) to me.
  - blamazon 4y ago
    If you look into it the primary intent of the ordinance is to ensure hotel workers can get help fast if they are assaulted in the course of their job, and the secondary intent is to prevent them from being overworked without consent. Which makes this ploy especially distasteful in my eyes - bit of a "the city made us make your servants feel safe and valued at work" fee.
exabrial 4y ago
Better said: Covering the cost of stupid laws with stupid fees is a cost of business.