Bermudian hotel workers walkout to demand compensation for tips, 1994


For hotel workers to be paid the over $1 million dollars they believed they were owed in tips collected from hotel customers.

Time period

February 22, 1994 to May 28, 1994


Jump to case narrative


Bermuda Industrial Union (BIU) – general trade union that represented the hotel workers
Ottiwell Simmons—president of BIU, oversaw the actions of the campaign and represented the union in public and to the media.


Not Known

External allies

Not Known

Involvement of social elites

Benjamin Hooks—former executive director of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) who voiced support for the hotel workers’ right to strike


Hotel Employers of Bermuda (HEB)
Bermuda Hotels Association (BHA)

Nonviolent responses of opponent

Not Known

Campaigner violence

Not Known

Repressive Violence

Not Known


Economic Justice



Group characterization

Hotel Workers

Groups in 1st Segment

Bermuda Industrial Union
Ottiwell Simmons

Groups in 2nd Segment

Benjamin Hooks

Segment Length

Approximately 2 weeks

Success in achieving specific demands/goals

0 out of 6 points


1 out of 1 points


2 out of 3 points

Total points

3 out of 10 points

Notes on outcomes

The campaign was completely unsuccessful in achieving its goal. Three hearings ruled against the union in favor of the hoteliers and a court injunction ended the workers’ strike, which was almost a last resort action.

The BIU was relentless in attempting to achieve its goal. Despite three rulings in favor of the hoteliers, the BIU remained active and continued to demand compensation for its workers.

The campaign experienced considerable growth. As the campaign progressed, more workers supported the union. Meeting attendance increased by from 200 to 300 and eventually, 1,500 workers from 20 major hotels participated in the strike, however, the campaign did not gained only one known ally: Benjamin Hooks

Database Narrative

On January 14 1993, the Essential Industries Dispute Settlement Board (EIDSB) agreed to a ruling regarding a dispute between Bermudian hotel workers and hoteliers. Hotel workers, represented by the Bermuda Industrial Union (BIU), claimed that they were owed over $1 million in tips from the hoteliers. The hoteliers, members of the Hotel Employers of Bermuda (HEB), argued that the hotel workers hadn’t properly requested compensation for the tips. The EIDSB’s initial ruling was characterized by ambiguous wording and as a result, both parties interpreted the ruling to be in their favor. Consequently, the government called for another board to examine the dispute.

The new board declared a ruling in August. The new ruling, like the initial ruling, possessed very ambiguous language, but despite the ambiguous language, the HEB hailed the ruling as a victory for the hoteliers. The HEB’s reaction to the ruling would provoke an equally passionate reaction from the BIU.

The BIU immediately decided to pursue a third appeal regarding their dispute. The BIU president, Ottiwell Simmons, maintained that the hoteliers had collected gratuities from their customers from February 25, 1992, until February 24, 1993, and kept the money for themselves. On February 22 1994, 30 hotel workers marched to the HEB headquarters in order to present a petition to the HEB executive director, John Harvey. A week later, on the 1st of March, Simmons called a three-hour meeting at the union headquarters and during the meeting, 80 hotel workers left and marched over to the Labour Ministry to present Labour Minister John Irving Pearman with the same petition that was presented to the HEB. The petition, which had 1,000 signatures, restated their claim to the gratuity money. The BIU also threatened to hold a strike vote on the 15th of March, if the dispute hadn’t been resolved by then.

Two days after receiving the petition, Pearman told the media that another hearing would likely be held in April. Upon hearing the news, the HEB responded in outrage. HEB lawyer Alan Dunch issued a letter to Pearman, lambasting him for reacting to the BIU’s threats with a call for a third hearing.

As promised, the BIU held a strike vote via secret ballot on the 15th of March and an overwhelming majority of the 200 members in attendance voted in favor of a potential strike. Simmons was ecstatic after the vote and told media, “This was one of the largest and best meetings we have ever had.” Simmons then added that the strike would not happen if the April hearing were to happen as planned, without interruption from the HEB and its lawyer. Later that month, Simmons met with the former executive director of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), Dr. Benjamin Hooks, and he supported the hotel workers’ right to strike, telling the media that he “[didn’t] know of anything that takes away the right of a worker to strike…”

On the 19th of April, a third hearing was held with a new board consisting of an American arbitrator, a former hotel chief, and the president of the Bermudian Senate. The day before, the BIU met and decided that it would follow through with its threat of a strike if conditions were not met. The new board eventually echoed the ruling of the previous board, ruling in favor of the HEB. The decision left members of the BIU infuriated and according to Simmons, “They wanted a strike, but we had to restrain ourselves.”

Simmons’ comments would not quiet the abundance of rumors regarding a potential strike. Officials from the Bermuda Hotels Association (BHA) were especially concerned about a potential work stoppage and met with Labour Minister Pearman on May 22nd to express their concerns. Four days later the BIU held a strike vote and 299 of 300 members in attendance voted in favor of the strike.

The next day at 5:30 a.m., on the 27th of May, 1,500 workers from 20 major hotels commenced an indefinite strike. Many hotel workers also established picket lines in front of 12 of the 20 hotels. The strike occurred on the eve of Memorial Day in the United States and many experts expected the holiday weekend to be a busy one for the hotel industry. Bellboys, maids, and other essential hotel staff participated in the strike. The strike affected an estimated 4,000 tourists, the majority of which were from the United States. There were many reports of cancellations and of guests leaving earlier than expected. Before the situation could escalate out of control, the Bermudian government took steps to put an end to the strike.

Later in the evening, Bermuda’s supreme court ordered an injunction, which effectively ruled the strike illegal and mandated its end. News of the injunction, however, did not reach the workers until the next day. Picketers left their posts at 10 a.m. the next morning to attend what would end up being a six and a half hour meeting that detailed the findings of the court and ordered the workers to return to work. The end of the meeting at 4:30 p.m. also marked the end of a rather unsuccessful campaign for the hotel workers; the workers never received any gratuity money, the strike damaged Bermuda’s image in the United States, and the HEB looked into changing the labour laws to prevent something similar from happening again. 


Not Known


Associated Press. “Court ruling cuts Bermuda strike short” St. Louis Post-Dispatch 29 May 1994
----. “Hotel strike affects Bermuda vacations” Watertown Daily Times (NY) 28 May 1994

Day, Marcus. “Hotels brace as strike reports grow” The Royal Gazette 26 May 1994

Egan, Paul. “BIU calls strike in ‘all hotels’” The Royal Gazette 27 May 1994
----. “Hoteliers want labour laws changed” The Royal Gazette 31 May 1994
----. “Hotels ‘strike equals layoffs’” The Royal Gazette 28 May 1994

Orlando Sentinel, The. “Hotel workers back on job in Bermuda” The Orlando Sentinel 29 May 1994

Royal Gazette, The. “BIU chief: hotel workers in ‘strike mode’” The Royal Gazette 28 April 1994
----. “Defiant hotel workers voted to strike- unless government holds a hearing into their cash row” The Royal Gazette 16 March 1994
----. “Disruption full hotels” The Royal Gazette 28 May 1994
----. “HEB lawyer blast Pearman” The Royal Gazette 4 March 1994
----. “Hotel workers may go on strike in April” The Royal Gazette 2 March 1994
----. “The Labour Minister was yesterday accused of caving in to hotel bosses and agreeing to restrict of a new industrial dispute hearing” The Royal Gazette 20 April 1994
----. “Only just recovering” The Royal Gazette 27 May 1994
----. “Nothing should take away a worker’s right to strike, a top American civil rights campaigner told the Bermuda Industrial Union yesterday” The Royal Gazette 17 March 1994
----. “Strike will have effect on Bermuda image” The Royal Gazette 31 May 1994
----. “Swan in call for labour peace” The Royal Gazette 28 May 1994
----. “Union officials and hotel chiefs come face to face today at yet another hearing into their long-running contract row” The Royal Gazette 19 April 1994
----. “What’s behind the latest hotel dispute” The Royal Gazette 28 May 1994

Sharp, Gene. Waging Nonviolent Struggle: 20th Century Practice and 21st Century Potential. Boston: Porter Argent Publishers, Inc, 2005.

Wright, Alan. “Strike causes cancelled bookings” The Royal Gazette 30 May 1994

Additional Notes

There was no indication that the BIU acquired any strong allies, but some may view the Labour Minister, John Irving Pearman, as an ally because he allowed for a third hearing to take place, even after the first two hearings ruled in favor of the HEB.

M.R. Changes (05/04/2011): "Protest Meetings" added to segments 1 and 2 for BIU meetings about strike and action, "Declarations of Intention" added to segment 5 for repeated declaration of strike, "Declaration by organizations" added for support by NAACP former leader, Growth score lowered from 3 to 2 because of lack of support from allies or partners.

Name of researcher, and date dd/mm/yyyy

Julio Alicea 12/12/2010