By Daniel E. Craig, Reknown
Given that so many people have a stake in the Trump brand, was it responsible or prudent for Trump to run for the presidency on such a contentious platform?
Early last year, when a recruiter asked if I was interested in putting my name forward for a soon-to-open position as general manager of Trump Hotel in Toronto, I was conflicted. Donald J. Trump hadn’t yet announced his presidential bid; he was merely an outspoken, controversial character. And his hotel company was fast gaining a reputation for exceptional hospitality.
The year prior, I had lunch at Trump New York with a friend who was an executive with Trump Hotels, and he had nothing but praise for Trump and his family. After lunch, he took me on a tour, and the property wasn’t over-the-top and garish, as I expected, but tastefully designed and relatively understated.
Nevertheless, I had enough distaste for Trump’s politics to know that I couldn’t work for him. But before I could decline the opportunity, the company decided I wasn’t “the right fit.”
It was no sweat for me. I didn’t want or need the job. But what about the thousands of employees who depend on the Trump brand for their livelihood and now find themselves caught in the cross hairs of an ugly presidential campaign?
Trump has lent his name to a range of products, including wines, clothing and golf resorts, but it’s perhaps the hotels that stand to suffer the most. Why? Because Trump’s campaign rhetoric contravenes the spirit of hospitality. Read more »