The idea of Ashotel, the tourism sector's employers' association in Tenerife, to push workers to the limit has infected the image of the south of the island of Gran Canaria. The recent strike in the tourism sector in the province of Santa Cruz de Tenerife highlights an underlying financial conflict: the disconnect between economic growth in tourism and the redistribution of profits among workers. With 76.821 direct jobs in the hospitality industry—more than 33.600 in accommodation and 43.000 in restaurants—and record visitor numbers, unions complain that wages have not kept pace with business profitability. While the south of Tenerife concentrates a large part of this wealth, with areas such as Costa Adeje and Playa de Las Américas recording occupancy rates close to 90% during Easter, staff complain of precarious working conditions.
In contrast, in southern Gran Canaria—which shares a similar tourism and demographic profile—the conflict was resolved through an agreement that raises wages by 9% until 2026, incorporates technical improvements such as elevating beds, and commits to job continuity. This difference in results reflects not only divergences in union strategy, but also pressure from local stakeholders over the distribution of tourism benefits, one of the main economic drivers of the Canary Islands. In 2024, Gran Canaria received more than 4,6 million tourists, while Tenerife exceeded 5 million, resulting in an injection of more than €7.500 billion into both island economies.
The refusal of Tenerife's business community to agree to similar salary increases has raised alarm bells at a time of economic boom. The preliminary agreement proposed progressive increases of 6%, which the workers' assemblies deemed insufficient, despite the inclusion of key elements such as elevating beds and clauses to protect purchasing power. Union pressure is growing in the face of a model that labor representatives describe as "unsustainable" because it depends on sacrificing workforces who do not directly benefit from the sector's growth.
The reputational impact is also a financial factor to consider: the strike during Holy Week—one of the most profitable seasons of the year—took place in key tourist areas, generating international visibility and potentially affecting the destination's perception of stability. The conflict highlighted the lack of an effective mediation mechanism between unions and employers in Tenerife, unlike in Las Palmas, where dialogue did lead to agreements. The regional president, Fernando Clavijo, failed to prevent the strike, while the Ashotel employers' association now sees social peace threatened in the short term.
Furthermore, the inaction of the Tenerife employers' association is causing collateral damage to southern Gran Canaria, which has already reached a favorable agreement with the workers. The image of widespread labor conflict in the Canary Islands, amplified by international media, threatens to erode the competitiveness of Gran Canaria's main tourist hub, especially in markets such as the British and German markets, which are sensitive to the stability of the destination. The damage is twofold: reputational and economic, as it tarnishes the progress achieved through collective bargaining in Las Palmas and distorts investment efforts in job quality and stability.
Thus, the conflict in Santa Cruz de Tenerife serves as a reflection of the structural tensions within the Canary Islands' tourism model. The difference with southern Gran Canaria, where the conflict was defused, highlights the urgency of negotiated solutions that not only safeguard the destination's image but also honor the contributions of those who make its success possible: the hospitality industry workers. The paralysis in Tenerife, far from being a local issue, threatens to hinder the competitiveness of the entire archipelago.
