LA’s $30 minimum wage pushes hotel owners to breaking point
Hotel owners in Los Angeles are struggling financially due to a city-mandated minimum wage increase to $30 per hour by 2028, particularly affecting larger non-union hotels. Many owners report plummeting property values, difficulty selling assets, and are cutting staff and services to manage rising labor costs. Industry leaders warn of potential hotel closures and urge policymakers to reconsider the ordinance's impact.
- ▪The $30 minimum wage ordinance applies to non-union hotels with 60 or more rooms and will be fully implemented by 2028.
- ▪Hotel property values have significantly dropped, with one owner reporting a decline from $1.5 billion to $500 million over ten years.
- ▪Owners are reducing labor costs by 5% annually, eliminating positions, and adopting AI and robotics to cope with higher wages.
- ▪The Hotel Association of Los Angeles predicts layoffs, service reductions, and possible hotel closures as a result of the wage hike.
- ▪A February HALA report outlined the ordinance’s potential to cause widespread economic damage to the city’s hotel industry.
Opening excerpt (first ~120 words) tap to expand
Metro LA’s $30 minimum wage pushes hotel owners to breaking point By Benjamin Brown Published May 16, 2026, 10:00 a.m. ET Hotel owners are scrambling to flee Los Angeles, warning of financial ruin after soaring minimum wages and a lack of buyers for their properties. Jon Bortz’s company owns eight hotels in Los Angeles, but he wants out. The problem? No one’s buying. “We sold one last year — we would love to sell more of our hotels. I’ve stated that publicly in Los Angeles,” Bortz, CEO of Pebblebrook Hotel Trust, a publicly traded real estate investment trust, told The California Post. “But, there are no buyers.” 5 Hotel owners are scrambling to flee Los Angeles, warning of financial ruin after soaring minimum wages and a lack of buyers for their properties.
…
Excerpt limited to ~120 words for fair-use compliance. The full article is at New York Post.
Discussion
0 commentsMore from New York Post
