San Francisco Chronicle - (Sunday)
S.F. hotel cleaning rules strictest in U.S.
“This ordinance does little to serve the public good, harms the No. 1 industry in San Francisco and further delays the return of more than 25,000 San Francisco hotel employees to work.”
San Francisco’s adoption of the strictest hotel and office cleaning standard in the country is sparking controversy.
On Tuesday, the Board of Supervisors unanimously passed the emergency Healthy Buildings ordinance, which mandates multiple daily cleanings and the disinfection of common areas in hotels and office buildings over 50,000 square feet. Daily hotel room cleanings and disinfection are required unless the guest declines.
“This legislation is going to boost customer confidence in San Francisco’s hotels and help our economic recovery,” said Supervisor Aaron Peskin, sponsor of the ordinance, which exempts government buildings because of legal jurisdiction issues.
The Hotel Council of San Francisco and the California Hotel and Lodging Associa
Kevin Carroll, CEO, Hotel Council of San Francisco tion, which both represent owners, oppose the measure, calling it an additional financial burden for an industry already devastated by the collapse of travel. More cleaning requirements will expose workers to more health risks and delay hotel reopenings, they said.
“This ordinance does little to serve the public good, harms the No. 1 industry in San Francisco and further delays the return of more
than 25,000 San Francisco hotel employees to work,” Kevin Carroll, CEO of the Hotel Council of San Francisco, said in a statement. The group supports cleaning rooms after a guest checks out, unless the guest requests cleaning earlier.
When asked whether hotel groups planned to sue, Carroll said in an interview that “all options are on the table.” The Building Owners and Managers Association of San Francisco wrote in a letter to legislators that the ordinance was redundant given state guidelines, and that office owners can’t afford the additional cleaning.
“The increased costs that will result from this unnecessary ordinance will likely force further layoffs, as the reduced occupancy of buildings continues across 2020 and into 2021. Put simply, there is not enough cash flow to afford the increased operating costs, and owners will seek to reduce that cost burden,” the letter stated. Hiring one additional porter who is a union member to clean costs around $8,000 per month, according to the group.
The average 250room hotel would pay an additional $220,000 per year to comply with the measure, according to a study by Hotel Asset Value Enhancement, an advisory firm. In addition, a 250room hotel will pay an estimated $498,000 per year to comply with state and national coronavirus safety guidelines. Carroll of the Hotel Council said the expenses are significant.
Anand Singh, president of
Unite Here Local 2, a hotel workers union that supports the measure, said the ordinance would add $3.80 per open room in daily costs, based on the hotel study, a minimal amount that would likely be passed on to guests. “The reduction of cleaning services is all about profit,” he said.
“What this does is set the nation’s strongest standards for hotel reopening,” Singh said of the ordinance. “It positions San Francisco as the top destination for travelers who are concerned with safety.” He said COVID19 cases at hotels elsewhere demonstrate that the industry won’t adequately protect workers without additional regulations.
The fight over daily housecleaning predates the pandemic. Marriott’s “Make a Green Choice” program allowed guests to opt out of daily housekeeping in exchange for rewards. Workers unions opposed the program, which they said made housekeepers’ work more difficult.
Larrilou Carumba, a housekeeper at the San Francisco Marriott Marquis, said not cleaning a room for days is a bigger safety risk during the coronavirus. “It’s really hard to sanitize rooms without cleaning for days,” said Carumba, who is a member of Unite Here Local 2.
John Swartzberg, a clinical professor emeritus of diseases and vaccinology at UC Berkeley, declined to comment on the San Francisco ordinance, but said coronavirus transmission from surfaces is a secondary risk compared to the spread from droplets and possible airborne particles, and the focus for cleaning
“needs to be on the areas that people touch.”
State guidelines for hotels call for “thorough” cleaning in hightraffic areas like lobbies, front desks and entryways without requiring a specific frequency. The San Francisco ordinance requires multiple cleanings per day.
Cleaners could risk infection in rooms without appropriate ventilation, said Mark Nicas, an emeritus professor of environmental health sciences at UC Berkeley. An infected person can leave behind virus particles that aren’t immediately circulated out, he said. State guidelines call for hotel workers to turn on ventilation systems and open windows when possible while cleaning.
Stanley Chen, regional manager at sanitation company BerryClean, worries about coronavirus exposure risks for his staff and tells them to get tested frequently.
Cleaners wear singleuse equipment including latex gloves, shoe covers and cloth masks. They usually scrub with a bleach solution, or hydrogen peroxide or hydrochloric acid when customers ask for a nonbleach disinfectant. “There’s a lot of misinformation out there or debate on which product should be used,” Chen said. “We just stick with bleach, hydrogen peroxide, and hydrochloric acid.”
Some groups have expressed concern that frequent use of cleaning supplies may come with their own risks. “Health risks include neurological, dermatological, and reproductive problems as well as an array of respiratory ailments,” according to InnuScience, a company that makes cleaning products it says are ecofriendly.
Anna Kramer and Roland Li are San Francisco Chronicle staff writers. Email: anna.kramer@ sfchronicle.com, roland.li@ sfchronicle.com Twitter: @anna_c_kramer, @rolandlisf