No, the issue is quite clear here, hotels dont want to pay a living wage for labor. How much clearer can it be?
This can resolve itself in many ways. The classical outcome is that some hotels go out of business, and the supply of hotel rooms drops to the point where the demand means that a more realistic price level can be reached.
The potentially better outcome is that smaller business that rely on non-wage workers (like family-run businesses) can effectively employ "workers" at a much lower rate in the hopes of outlasting the contraction of the hotel room market.
The worse outcome is that big corporations can allow certain markets to lose money, because they are drawing sufficient income from other markets, and wait out the first culling, which will disproportionately affect local hotels that both rely on wage workers and do not have a capital backstop.
Or, the market can just recover organically due to circumstances completely out of the hotel's control -- the local labor market could contract meaning that workers are willing to take a lower salary, or the tourist market could expand meaning they can book more rooms, or business expenditures for hotel rooms could increase faster than price levels overall.
Or extracted too much capital when they could instead of paying down debt and got trapped under a rock when interest rates went up.
Speaking for my org personally we have zero debt, and are cash positive largely because policies like a hotel expense cap that prevent sales people from draining to company coffers
If I buy a farm/restaurant/hotel/retailer for top dollar and complain about cost of wages making it unprofitable, the problem isn’t the wages. But you’re stuck with your acquisition price, so you’ll lobby for lower wages and make no mention of your sunk costs.