Stuck in the Middle: How Hospitality Workers in Greece View Working Conditions

Greek tourism and hospitality have once again become a national success story in economic terms. The sector contributes more than a fifth of national GDP and employment, remains central to the country’s international image, and is projected to keep growing over the next decade. But beneath this strong performance lies a more uncomfortable question: what does work in Greek hospitality actually feel like for the people who keep the sector running?

Our recent national survey* on working conditions in Greek tourism and hospitality set out to answer exactly that. Drawing on responses from 451 workers across the sector, complemented by 247 qualitative comments, the study examined working life through the lens of five Fair Work principles: pay, contracts, conditions, management and representation. The overall picture that emerged was not one of simple exploitation, nor one of consistent fairness. Instead, it was something more complicated, and arguably more important for the industry to confront.

Greek hospitality workers appear to be stuck in the middle

By that, I mean that many workers report elements of formal fairness: written contracts, regular payment, and in some workplaces respectful treatment from managers. Yet these formal protections often sit alongside a very different everyday reality: wages that do not feel sufficient, unpaid or unrecorded extra hours, exhausting seasonal schedules, limited rest, weak employee voice, and a widespread sense that poor conditions have become part of the job. In short, the survey suggests that Greek hospitality is not defined by uniformly poor work, but by partial and uneven fairness.

That matters because the future of the sector will depend not only on demand, investment and destination competitiveness, but also on whether hospitality can remain a viable and attractive place to work.

A sector of contrasts

One of the clearest messages from the research is that working conditions in Greek hospitality are deeply segmented. Some workers, especially those in larger and more structured organisations, describe relatively fair experiences: formal contracts, more predictable systems, decent relationships with managers, and a stronger sense of professionalism. Others, especially in smaller or more seasonal settings, describe something very different: underpayment, long hours, unpaid overtime, informal arrangements, abusive behaviour, and limited ability to challenge unfairness.

This coexistence of fair and unfair work is the report’s central finding. It explains why headline averages can be misleading. If one simply asks whether workers have contracts, many do. If one asks whether they are paid regularly, many are. If one asks whether management is always hostile, the answer is no. But if one asks whether pay feels fair relative to effort, whether contracts reflect actual working hours, whether rest time is protected, or whether workers feel able to speak up safely, the picture becomes much more fragile.

This is why the title “stuck in the middle” feels so appropriate. Greek hospitality is not a sector where formal employment standards are absent. It is a sector where those standards are often present on paper but weaker in practice.

Pay: legal does not always mean fair

Pay remains one of the strongest pressure points in the sector. Our survey found that many respondents were earning at or above the statutory minimum wage and receiving pay for the hours formally recorded. Yet perceptions of pay fairness were far more divided than a simple compliance reading would suggest. A sizeable minority reported underpayment or not being compensated for all hours worked, while many others appeared uncertain or neutral when asked whether they were paid fairly.

That neutrality is important. It may indicate that low relative pay has become normalised in hospitality work. Workers are not necessarily saying their wages are acceptable; rather, some may have come to see inadequate pay as simply part of how the industry works.

The qualitative responses make this point even more sharply. Workers repeatedly described wages as disconnected from the intensity of the work, the cost of living, and the demands of seasonal employment. Some referred to years of wage stagnation despite rising living costs and the obvious economic success of tourism. Others framed low pay not only as an economic issue but as a question of recognition and dignity: if the work is physically and emotionally demanding, and if the sector depends on skilled and committed people, then wages that barely cover basic needs are experienced as a sign that labour is undervalued.

This distinction matters. In hospitality, fair pay is not judged solely against the minimum wage. It is judged against workload, effort, living costs, and whether workers can imagine building a sustainable life in the sector.

Contracts: formalisation without full protection

If pay reveals one tension, contracts reveal another. At first glance, the sector appears reasonably formalised. A large majority of respondents reported having a written employment agreement, and many were employed under permanent full-time arrangements. On paper, this suggests a degree of stability.

But again, the lived experience is more complicated. Many workers reported a mismatch between contracted and actual working hours, with practice extending beyond what was formally stated. Holiday compensation and time-off arrangements also appeared unevenly implemented. The result is a model of employment that can look compliant while still leaving workers exposed.

The qualitative comments were especially revealing here. Some respondents described contracts as little more than formal shells, while the real employment relationship was governed by personal deals, informal expectations and managerial discretion. Others referred to undeclared elements of pay, cash top-ups, extra hours not officially recorded, or payroll practices that obscured the reality of time worked. In other words, contracts exist, but they do not always function as reliable guarantees of fair work.

This is an important distinction for industry leaders. The question is no longer only whether workers have contracts, but whether those contracts accurately reflect the real job: the real hours, the real pay, the real expectations, and the real rights attached to the role.

Working Conditions: the real strain of seasonal hospitality

The issue that most clearly cuts through the report is work intensity, especially in seasonal settings. Across the data, workers described hospitality as physically and emotionally demanding, with long hours, pressure, limited rest, and a pace of work that can be difficult to sustain over time. The report also points to workplace violence and abusive behaviour as part of the reality for some workers, particularly in less regulated environments.

Seasonality amplifies these pressures. For many workers, the summer season is not simply a busy period; it is an employment regime in which hours expand, rest shrinks, and dependence on the employer deepens. Workers in seasonal roles may also rely on employer-provided accommodation, which some respondents described as inadequate. That combination of long hours, restricted time off, and dependence on the employer for both income and housing creates a structurally unequal relationship. It also reduces workers’ willingness or ability to challenge unfair treatment.

This is where our study becomes especially relevant for the wider future of the sector. Greece’s hospitality model has long depended on flexibility and seasonal labour mobilisation. But a model built on intense work, weak recovery time and low predictability may no longer be sustainable in a labour market where workers have more alternatives and are increasingly unwilling to tolerate poor conditions.

Management and representation: voice without power

One of the more nuanced findings of the report is that management is not perceived as uniformly unfair. Many respondents, especially in larger organisations, described respectful treatment and generally positive workplace relationships. That is important, because it shows that better employment practices do exist in the Greek sector and are not merely theoretical.

At the same time, the survey also reveals a clear limitation: employee voice remains weak. Workers may be able to express concerns informally, but that does not necessarily mean they have the power to influence decisions or challenge unfair practices. Union membership is low, collective representation is limited, and many workers in smaller or seasonal workplaces appear to have little confidence that speaking up will change anything.

This matters because weak representation does not only affect one dimension of work. It shapes all the others. When workers lack effective voice, low pay is harder to challenge, contract breaches are harder to contest, and poor conditions are easier to normalise. The report describes this as a form of “voice without power,” where workers may recognise the structural nature of the problems they face, but lack the institutional mechanisms to act on that awareness.

Why this matters now

The implications go well beyond employee wellbeing. Greece’s tourism and hospitality sector is projected to keep growing, while labour shortages remain a major concern. If employers continue to rely on a model in which flexibility is prioritised over security, and compliance over genuine fairness, the industry may find it increasingly difficult to attract, retain and motivate the workforce it needs. The report itself notes that improving working conditions is not just a social issue but a strategic one, especially in a country where the sector’s economic importance is so pronounced and future labour shortages could be severe.

The encouraging part of the story is that the survey does not present unfairness as inevitable. Better practices already exist, particularly in larger and more formalised organisations. The challenge is therefore not to invent a new model from scratch, but to make fairer employment more consistent, reliable and widespread across the sector.

For employers, that means asking some uncomfortable but necessary questions. Is pay merely compliant, or is it genuinely liveable? Do contracts reflect real working time? Are seasonal workers protected from excessive hours and poor accommodation? Do managers have the capability and incentive to lead fairly under pressure? And do employees have meaningful ways to raise concerns without fear of being ignored or penalised?

For policymakers and industry bodies, it means recognising that labour quality is now a competitiveness issue. A tourism strategy built around growth alone is incomplete if it leaves the employment model untouched.

Greek hospitality is a success story in many respects. But if the sector wants to remain resilient, attractive and credible, it cannot afford to leave workers stuck in the middle, formally protected, perhaps, but practically exposed. Fair and decent work is no longer a peripheral issue in hospitality; it is fundamental to the sector’s future resilience, attractiveness, and sustainability.

* This report forms part of a collaborative international research project lead by the GHRA, involving the University of Strathclyde (Dr Anastasios Hadjisolomou), Bournemouth University (Dr Charalampos Giousmpasoglou and Dr Evangelia Marinakou), the University of Piraeus (Dr Alexandra Chytiri), Nottingham Trent University (Dr Fotios Mitsakis and Dr. Saurabh Jain), and Manchester Metropolitan University (Dr Orestis Papadopoulos). 

You can access and download the report here: http://dx.doi.org/10.18746/k163-zr88 

Media Contact

Charalampos Giousmpasoglou

Principal Academic in HRM at Bournemouth University Business School [email protected]