Navigating Emotional Labor and Social Exchange in Hospitality: A Comparative Study of Food and Beverage Workers in Tel Aviv and New Orleans During COVID-19

Abstract

This study examines the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on emotional management and social exchanges in the hospitality industry, focusing on food and beverage workers in Tel Aviv and New Orleans. Through 66 in-depth interviews conducted between 2021 and 2022, we explore how workers navigated altered social dynamics, heightened emotional labor, and moral dilemmas. Our analysis, grounded in Social Exchange Theory, dramaturgical theory, and the sociology of emotions, reveals three key themes: social and emotional distancing, crisis-driven emotional management, and the reconceptualization of hospitality between altruism and pragmatism. Despite different cultural contexts, workers in both cities faced similar challenges, highlighting the globalized nature of the industry. The pandemic disrupted traditional reciprocal exchanges, forcing a reevaluation of hospitality practices. Finally, this study stresses how emotional and moral dilemmas became central to social exchanges during the pandemic.

1. Introduction: Social Interaction and the Hospitality Industry

The COVID-19 pandemic has dramatically reshaped the global hospitality industry, challenging established norms of social interaction and service delivery. This study explores the experiences of food and beverage workers in Tel Aviv and New Orleans during this unprecedented crisis, examining how they navigated emotional management and social exchange in a radically altered work environment. Through in-depth interviews, this study illuminates the lived experiences of these workers while grappling with new safety protocols, personal fears, and economic uncertainties. This study not only contributes to theoretical discussions on emotional labor and social exchange but also provides insights into building resilience in the hospitality sector.

Social interaction is not just prevalent in the hospitality sector; it is central to its operations (Tajeddini et al. 2020). As a service-oriented industry, hospitality revolves around the concept of caring for others in a way that mirrors caring for oneself (Walker and Walker 2014). The culture in this sector is deeply rooted in the value of serving and satisfying guests, a principle promoted by top management and embedded throughout organizations (Ibid.). The industry encompasses a broad array of businesses, including hotels, restaurants, travel agencies, event planning, and theme parks, all focused on meeting guests’ needs through accommodation, food and beverage services, entertainment, and leisure activities. It thrives on an entrepreneurial mindset that fosters innovation, competitive advantage, and adaptability to shifting consumer demands (Tajeddini et al. 2020).

The cultural context of hospitality varies significantly across different locales, shaping social norms and expectations within the industry (Koc 2020). Tel Aviv and New Orleans, the focus of this study, are both known for their hospitality sectors and nightlife (Adams and Sakakeeny 2019; Ben Rafael and Ben Rafael 2018) and offer, as will be elaborated later on, distinct cultural backdrops that influence their hospitality sectors. Their cultural nuances are pivotal in shaping the emotional labor expected from hospitality workers in each city, particularly during crises like the COVID-19 pandemic.

The COVID-19 pandemic, which brought the world to a standstill in 2020, had profound economic and social repercussions for the hospitality sector. The pandemic dramatically disrupted the hospitality industry. The drastic reduction in human interactions fundamentally altered the way the industry operates (Ardani and Harianto 2021). Fear of contagion and government-imposed lockdowns triggered significant changes in consumer behavior, with people staying home, avoiding public spaces, and growing more concerned about hygiene. This shift led to a sharp decline in sales, as traditional guest service methods reliant on personal interaction became impractical, sometimes illegal, and often impossible to maintain (Uford et al. 2023). Trust in others, including delivery services, was affected, contributing to a decrease in prepared food purchases (Devine et al. 2021). In essence, the pandemic’s social distancing measures and resulting uncertainty deeply influenced how businesses operated and how individuals perceived safety and trust within the hospitality industry (Ardani and Harianto 2021).

These disruptions highlighted the precarious nature of hospitality work, which is marked by low wages, limited job security, and challenging working conditions. Scholars have noted that these characteristics are not unique to specific regions but are shared across national contexts, underscoring the globalized nature of the hospitality sector (Bachem et al. 2019; Papadopoulos and Ioannou 2022). Furthermore, poor working conditions in the industry are not solely a consequence of its operational structure but also stem from broader institutional, regulatory, and political–economic changes that have intensified over recent decades (Bianchi 2018; Papadopoulos and Lyddon 2020).

One of the most prominent sectors within hospitality is the food and beverage industry, commonly referred to as restaurants and bars. These establishments delight customers by creating atmospheres that engage the senses—designing spaces not only for food and drinks but also for the enjoyment of music and ambiance (Hemmington 2007). Whether food and beverage workers enjoy their work varies, depending on factors like the work environment, management practices, and individual personalities. While some workers find pleasure in their interactions with customers and the lively environment, others experience stress and emotional overload, leading to burnout due to the job’s demands (Grandey et al. 2005).

Research by Grandey et al. (2005) found that emotional labor, such as the requirement to display positive emotions constantly, can lead to emotional exhaustion among service workers, diminishing their enjoyment of the job. Similarly, Pizam (2004) notes that while the hospitality industry can be rewarding, it poses significant challenges, such as long hours, high stress, and low pay, all of which detract from job satisfaction. However, studies like DiPietro and Milmans’s (2004) suggest that passionate workers with supportive environments may find joy in their work, especially through positive customer interactions and social engagement. Nevertheless, restaurant and bar workers, like others in hospitality, often face precarious working conditions including long hours exceeding legal limits, intense work, and unpredictable schedules (Axelsson et al. 2017).

The hospitality industry, including food and beverage, is, as indicated above, sociologically significant because it exemplifies emotional management, which is used by workers in capitalist economies to cater to customers (Erköse 2017). While emotional labor, as indicated above, refers to the process by which workers manage their emotions to align with organizational expectations during interactions with customers, coworkers, or superiors, emotional management is a broader term that encompasses how individuals regulate their own emotions in any context, including personal, social, and professional settings. It includes voluntary or involuntary processes used to align emotions with personal goals or external demands (Kogovsek and Kogovsek 2014). Focusing on emotional labor as a case of emotional management, strategies such as surface acting (displaying expected emotions that are not genuinely felt) and deep acting (aligning internal feelings with expected emotions) are commonly used while conducting labor management (Bericat 2016). However, there are times when conscious management fails to cover genuine emotional displays, as described by Zapf (2002), where employees show emotions without conscious effort. This does not imply ‘real’ versus ‘fake’ emotions; rather, it highlights that all emotional displays are performative, though some may be perceived as more authentic than others. The process of regulating emotions to meet organizational standards is known as emotional labor (Amissah et al. 2022).

Another theory, Social Exchange Theory (SET), offers a less critical view of workplace social interactions. Developed by Homans (1958), SET posits that social behavior is motivated by the exchange of resources—tangible or intangible—between individuals. In hospitality, SET suggests that workers engage in reciprocal exchanges, where emotional management is balanced by rewards such as job satisfaction, financial compensation, and a sense of accomplishment (Wang et al. 2022). This exchange fosters a supportive work environment, encouraging teamwork, reducing stress, and enhancing career growth, which, in turn, can boost job performance.

While SET emphasizes mutual benefits, it often overlooks the emotional costs these exchanges may impose on workers. Emotional labor theorists, like Hochschild ([1983] 2003), critique the commodification of emotions in the service industry, showing how constantly managing emotions to meet organizational expectations can lead to alienation, burnout, and emotional exhaustion. SET provides a more neutral or positive perspective, highlighting successful exchanges but underplaying the complexities and potential exploitation inherent in emotional labor. These tensions intensified during the global COVID-19 pandemic, with the hospitality industry, especially food and beverage, being severely affected due to its reliance on personal service in close-contact environments.

Despite the wealth of studies in the literature on emotional labor and Social Exchange Theory in the hospitality industry, existing studies largely focus on ‘normal’ operational circumstances, with limited attention to crisis scenarios such as the COVID-19 pandemic (Zhang et al. 2021). The unique challenges posed by the pandemic—characterized by heightened emotional demands, altered social exchanges, and disruptions to traditional hospitality practices—remain underexplored, particularly in cross-cultural contexts (Ibrahim et al. 2024). This study addresses these gaps by examining how food and beverage workers in Tel Aviv and New Orleans navigated their roles and emotions during this global crisis. Specifically, the research questions guiding this study are as follows: (1) How did workers manage emotional labor and social exchanges in the context of pandemic-induced disruptions? (2) In what ways have cultural and organizational differences between Tel Aviv and New Orleans impacted workers’ experiences? By integrating emotional labor theory, SET, and a cross-cultural lens, this study contributes novel insights into the resilience and adaptability of hospitality workers during unprecedented times, offering implications for both academic research and practical applications in crisis management within the industry.

2. Between Emotional Management, Social Exchange, and Performance

The sociology of emotions examines how emotions shape, and are shaped by, social interactions, structures, and processes. It integrates affective structures and emotional dynamics into sociological research, exploring emotions such as fear, trust, and shame in various contexts, including gender, work, and social movements. Emotions are considered fundamental to social life, influencing behavior and dynamics within social structures (Bericat 2016).

Social Exchange Theory (SET) (Homans 1958) explains employee–employer relationships as involving reciprocal exchanges of information, support, recognition, and rewards (Blau 2017). While the theory did not focus specifically on emotional exchanges, it laid the groundwork for understanding how reciprocity in social interactions can foster emotional bonds. In industries like hospitality, SET suggests that emotional management becomes part of the service exchange, contributing to job satisfaction and social recognition.

However, the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic drastically altered these reciprocal exchanges in hospitality work. The dynamic balance that SET proposes was disrupted as workers navigated new expectations, heightened risks, and changing norms of social interaction (Chen and Eyoun 2021; Kaushik and Guleria 2020). The usual rewards, such as customer appreciation, tips, and job security, were often overshadowed by increased stress, fear of contagion, and economic uncertainty (Baum et al. 2020). While SET posits that workers will continue to engage in these exchanges as long as the perceived benefits outweigh the costs, the pandemic shifted this equation by introducing new, unpredictable costs—particularly emotional ones. As a result, the exchanges became more complex, with workers frequently feeling that the benefits did not sufficiently compensate for the heightened emotional and physical risks they faced (Gursoy and Chi 2020).

Emotional labor, as a concept by Hochschild ([1983] 2003), introduces critiques of this exchange by addressing the management and exchange of emotions within social and organizational contexts. Hochschild argues that managing emotions for a wage can lead to alienation, as workers become distanced from their genuine feelings. Her research on flight attendants highlights the emotional toll of constantly having to display positive emotions, despite feeling otherwise. In the context of hospitality work during the pandemic, emotional labor became even more pronounced. Workers were expected to maintain a welcoming demeanor and provide high-quality service while grappling with fears of illness, enforcing safety protocols, and managing their own emotional turmoil. Lee and Madera (2019) further underscore the role of crises in amplifying emotional labor demands, emphasizing how hospitality employees are compelled to balance complex emotional and professional expectations in such circumstances.

The pandemic heightened the tension between what Goffman (1959) calls front-stage emotional performances (e.g., smiling and being courteous) and back-stage reality (e.g., stress, fear, and exhaustion), potentially deepening the sense of alienation and emotional strain. Erving Goffman’s dramaturgical sociology provides another lens for understanding how hospitality work was reshaped during the pandemic. Goffman views social interactions as theatrical performances, where individuals act as performers and others as the audience. In the hospitality industry, the front stage is where employees interact with customers, delivering performances aligned with service and hospitality expectations. The back stage is where workers can retreat, express their true feelings, and prepare for the next performance.

During the pandemic, the boundary between these two spaces blurred. Safety measures such as masks and physical barriers permeated the front stage, making it more difficult for workers to convey emotions. Meanwhile, the back stage became a place not only for emotional respite but also for managing heightened stress and anxiety related to job insecurity and health risks.

In other words, the pandemic reshaped traditional front-stage and back-stage roles, altering the dynamics of reciprocal exchanges. Workers had to take on new roles, such as enforcing mask mandates and managing customer compliance with health guidelines, which often led to confrontations and negative exchanges (Leoni et al. 2021). This shift further deviated from SET’s principles, where positive reciprocal exchanges are expected to result in mutual benefits. Instead, the pandemic introduced greater asymmetry into these exchanges, as workers experienced increased emotional labor and stress without the usual reciprocal benefits, such as customer gratitude or job security.

Moreover, the emotional labor of the front stage began to seep into the back stage as workers struggled with the pressures of an unpredictable work environment and the constant risk of COVID-19 exposure. This blurring of boundaries further complicated the reciprocal exchanges outlined by SET. The traditional notion of “time off” from emotional labor was compromised, as workers’ concerns extended beyond their shifts into their personal lives, leading to emotional exhaustion and burnout (Wang et al. 2025).

This study focuses on how workers in the food and beverage industry managed their work behavior, performances, and emotions during COVID-19 in two distinct cities: Tel Aviv-Jaffa and New Orleans. This comparative approach allows for a deeper understanding of how workers’ emotional experiences during the pandemic both align with and deviate from SET’s principles, revealing the nuanced interplay between emotional labor, social exchanges, and the challenging realities of hospitality work during a global crisis.

3. Why Tel Aviv and New Orleans?

Tel Aviv-Jaffa and New Orleans, both regarded as creative cities, derive significant economic value from their cultural assets (Florida 2003). Each city’s unique cultural identity and historical events have profoundly shaped its hospitality sector. Tel Aviv-Jaffa, a Middle Eastern hub in Israel, grapples with ongoing geopolitical tensions and social inequalities, particularly for Palestinian-Israelis, while positioning itself as the country’s liberal capital. New Orleans, located in the southern United States, has a complex history marked by racial disparities, yet its vibrant nightlife flourishes. Tel Aviv-Jaffa’s culinary scene and cultural production have weathered various crises, including terrorist attacks, which have periodically disrupted its economy and tested its resilience (Ben Rafael and Ben Rafael 2018). Similarly, New Orleans, renowned for its rich heritage in music, cuisine, and festivals, has endured significant challenges, most notably Hurricane Katrina, which devastated the city’s infrastructure and displaced much of its creative workforce (Campanella 2006). These historical challenges have made both cities’ hospitality industries particularly sensitive to disruptions, underscoring the importance of understanding how these sectors navigate and recover from crises.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, both cities implemented similar hospitality policies despite their different governance structures and cultural contexts. These measures included social distancing, limiting physical contact, and encouraging vaccination without universal mandates (Maor 2021; Rocco et al. 2020). In Tel Aviv-Jaffa, a centralized governance system allowed for swift policy implementation, such as early lockdowns and rapid vaccine distribution. Nevertheless, these measures still led to economic disruption and resistance from various sectors, including hospitality. In contrast, New Orleans, operating within a decentralized governance system, faced inconsistent and delayed policy responses, complicating the balance between public health measures and economic needs (Rocco et al. 2020). In both cities, the outcomes were similar: widespread illness, financial insecurity among workers, and increased precarity as many businesses failed.

Understanding the impact of such crises on the hospitality labor force is crucial, as this sector is integral to the cultural and economic vitality of creative cities. Hospitality workers are often on the frontlines during crises, experiencing shifts in policies, customer interactions, and economic stability. The pandemic exposed the fragility of hospitality businesses and the precarious nature of workers’ employment conditions, underscoring the need for more resilient strategies to support this vital workforce (Pine and Gilmore 1998; Pratt 2008). By studying the food and beverage sectors in Tel Aviv-Jaffa and New Orleans, we can gain insights into how different cultural and institutional contexts address crises. This cross-cultural analysis offers valuable lessons in resilience, emotional management, and recovery, revealing both common strategies and unique approaches that can inform future responses to similar disruptions (Pratt 2008, 2020).

4. Materials and Methods

This study involved conducting 66 in-depth interviews with individuals working in the food and beverage industries in New Orleans (31) and Tel Aviv (24). In Tel Aviv, we interviewed 19 employees and 4 bar and restaurant owners who also worked on the premises. In New Orleans, only one of the interviewees was an owner, who likewise worked on site. Including owners who actively work on the premises is empirically acceptable and does not conflict with the theoretical framework, as these individuals engage directly in the day-to-day operations and share in the emotional management and labor typically associated with employees (Humphrey et al. 2015).

The interviews were conducted between 2021 and 2022, with each session lasting between 60 and 90 min. Most of the interviews were conducted via Zoom by a team of two trained research assistants in each city. Some interviews were also conducted directly by the main researchers. All sessions were audio-recorded with participants’ consent and subsequently transcribed for analysis. To ensure confidentiality, pseudonyms were assigned to all participants, and no identifying information was included in the transcripts.

The interviews were guided by an indicative list of open-ended questions designed to explore themes such as emotional labor, workplace dynamics, changes in customer interactions, and coping mechanisms during the pandemic. This semi-structured format (Pearce 2012) allowed participants the flexibility to share unanticipated insights while ensuring the coverage of core themes.

Participants were selected using a combination of purposive sampling (Denieffe 2020) and snowball sampling (Parker et al. 2019) techniques to ensure a diverse representation of roles within the food and beverage industry, including waitstaff, bartenders, hosts, managers, and business owners. As mentioned, we added only business owners who also work at the establishment, as they are also using labor management (Ponting and Ponting 2023). Recruitment was conducted through direct outreach to establishments and snowball sampling, where initial participants referred colleagues and peers. To ensure the inclusion of varied perspectives, recruitment targeted individuals from a mix of high-end, mid-range, and casual food and beverage establishments. Participants were selected based on their willingness to share experiences and their active employment in the industry during the pandemic.

We used MAXQDA, a qualitative data analysis software, to systematically code and analyze the transcribed interviews. Specifically, MAXQDA’s coding functions were utilized to highlight key segments of text related to emotional management, social exchanges, job satisfaction, and the impact of COVID-19 on workers in the food and beverage industry. The software enabled efficient cross-referencing of codes, comparison of data across interviews, and identification of patterns and divergences between the two cultural contexts of New Orleans and Tel Aviv.

The data were analyzed by our international team of research assistants using a combination of Thematic Analysis and Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA). Thematic Analysis, as outlined by Braun and Clarke (2013), was employed to identify, analyze, and report patterns within the data. This method allowed for the exploration of recurring themes related to emotional management, social exchanges, and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on workers in the culinary industry.

In parallel, Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), following the principles of Fairclough (2013), was used to examine the linguistic and narrative structures within the interviews. This approach provided insights into the power dynamics, ideologies, and social structures that influenced workers’ experiences during the pandemic. The combination of Thematic Analysis and CDA enabled a comprehensive understanding of both the content and context of the interviews, allowing for a nuanced interpretation of the data.

5. Analysis

This in-depth analysis explores the lived experiences of culinary industry workers in Tel Aviv and New Orleans during the COVID-19 pandemic. It focuses on three key themes that emerged from the comparative study of the two cities, including social and emotional distancing, emotional management, and the re-conceptualization of hospitality work. While these themes are presented separately for analytical clarity, they often overlap, reflecting the complex and interconnected nature of workers’ experiences during this unprecedented period.

5.1. Theme 1: Social and Emotional Distancing

Social distancing measures and the reconfiguration of physical spaces dramatically altered the social dynamics within restaurants and bars. This theme examines how workers in Tel Aviv and New Orleans adapted to these changes, as well as how physical space influenced their ability to provide hospitality in the way they were accustomed to and believed was right. Many workers described pre-pandemic hospitality as involving enjoyable interactions with customers and creating a festive atmosphere, aligning with the concept of hospitality as a special event (Johann 2023).

Miriam, a resto-bar owner in Tel Aviv, expressed her frustration with the loss of intimacy: “People only want to eat outside. Even in the cold and the rain... There’s just a lot less human touch. Hospitality is so much about the ambiance and the human connections. That’s why people come back to certain places”. In Hebrew, the phrase “human touch” conveys a deeper meaning, encompassing both human connection and intimacy. It reflects the warmth and closeness created through conversation and even non-sexual physical gestures, such as a handshake or a reassuring pat on the shoulder.

Miriam’s comment underscores how the erosion of emotional and physical connections due to physical distancing measures disrupted the ambiance—an essential component of hospitality in her view. While this does not imply a different level of service, it reflects a shift in the dynamics of social and emotional exchanges that once defined her business. The diminished human connection, central to the concept of hospitality in Tel Aviv’s vibrant dining culture, represents a shift that affected not only the operational aspects of her restaurant but also the overall atmosphere and emotional satisfaction tied to providing a welcoming environment.

From the perspective of Social Exchange Theory (SET), these changes altered the reciprocal exchanges between workers and customers. Hospitality work traditionally involves a give-and-take relationship where emotional labor is reciprocated by customer appreciation, tips, and social recognition (Wang et al. 2022). However, physical distancing introduced new asymmetries into this exchange, diminishing the rewards of emotional labor and leading to further alienation (Hochschild [1983] 2003). Workers like Miriam found it more difficult to provide the level of service they believed was essential, leading to frustration and disconnection. The reduction in human touch not only impacted customer satisfaction (Wang et al. 2022) but also eroded the sense of accomplishment and reciprocal emotional exchanges that workers derive from their roles.

Jasmine, a restaurant floor manager from New Orleans, similarly described the impact of reduced seating capacity due to COVID-19 fears: “When you can only seat three tables, that whole environment changes entirely… The bustling marketplace atmosphere was gone during COVID times”. Her reflection on the loss of the “bustling marketplace atmosphere” underscores how spatial reconfiguration disrupted the social and emotional energy that once defined her restaurant. The transformation from a lively, interactive environment to a quiet, distanced space diminished not only the joy and sense of connection that had been integral to her establishment but also the reciprocal exchanges between staff and customers. This disruption took an emotional toll on workers, as the environment no longer facilitated the vibrant interactions that made their roles rewarding and meaningful.

Rivka, a hostess in a Tel Aviv restaurant, reflected on how social distancing affected customer interaction: “We had to separate tables and limit how many people could come in at once… It made it feel like we were pushing people away rather than welcoming them”. Rivka’s description of “pushing people away” further illustrates how distancing measures disrupted the relational aspects of her work. The physical separation of tables not only altered the restaurant’s layout but also reduced the emotional connection between staff and customers, making hospitality feel more distant and impersonal.

Chris, a bartender in New Orleans, discussed the logistical challenges of adapting to social distancing: “We had to turn our bustling bar into a half-empty space with a few scattered tables… It killed the vibe, and honestly, it killed the joy of working here. It didn’t feel like the same place”. Chris’s comment highlights the emotional impact of these spatial changes on both workers and the overall atmosphere. The bar’s transformation from a lively social hub to a “half-empty space” symbolized a significant loss in the emotional and social exchanges that make hospitality meaningful for its workers (DiPietro and Milman 2004).

These accounts illustrate how workers struggled to reconcile distancing protocols with their deeply ingrained notions of hospitality, which they had always associated with close, personal connections with customers (Johann 2023). The shift from bustling, lively environments to quieter, more distanced settings led to a loss of the emotional and social exchanges that had previously made their work meaningful (DiPietro and Milman 2004). This erosion of connection, as emphasized by Rivka’s and Chris’s reflections, set the stage for a deeper exploration of the emotional impact on hospitality workers as they navigated the psychological toll of maintaining service in an altered environment (Nelson 2009). Utilizing Goffman’s concepts of back-stage and front-stage roles, the pandemic reduced the ability to perform the usual social script of hospitality, forcing workers to adapt their roles as social actors in response to the evolving situation.

5.2. Theme 2: Emotional Management During the Pandemic

Emily, a waitress from New Orleans, spoke about the heightened stress of emotional labor during the pandemic: “It’s not just about smiling anymore. It’s about pretending you’re not scared, that you’re fine when you’re not. And the customers don’t see that... They just want their food, but you’re the one dealing with the fear every day”. Emily’s statement, “pretending you’re not scared,” reveals the internal conflict between her genuine emotions and the role she must perform. Aviad Raz’s (2002) work, for example, informs us of how workers might align their emotional displays with cultural and organizational norms, even at the expense of their personal well-being. Emily’s struggle exemplifies this tension, as she adjusts her emotional expressions to meet workplace expectations despite the personal cost.

The emotional toll of working in the hospitality industry, especially during the pandemic, is complex and can be analyzed through various theoretical frameworks. Drawing on Goffman’s concept of social interaction as performance, hospitality workers can be viewed as actors in a “theatrical show”, managing their emotions and behavior to meet customers’ expectations (Goffman 1959). Emotional expressions, in this sense, are carefully curated performances intended to create specific impressions. This aligns with Shulman’s (2017) insights on impression management, where he emphasizes that such emotional performances are not just surface-level displays but are embedded in the deeper dynamics of front-stage and back-stage behavior. The pandemic, by altering these spaces, forced workers to blur the lines between personal fears and professional facades, complicating their emotional management further.

While some workers may find value in the performative aspect of their roles, scholars like Hochschild ([1983] 2003) argue that emotional labor can be highly stressful. Similarly, Shulman (2017) discusses how modern-day performers, whether on social or digital stages, face significant strain from maintaining these public personas, which echoes the hidden, relentless nature of emotional labor in hospitality. This view is supported by Grandey et al. (2005) and Amissah et al. (2022), who further highlight the significant impact of emotional labor on workers’ well-being. These contrasting perspectives are echoed in the testimonies of workers from Tel Aviv and New Orleans, who describe, like Emily, feeling drained and dissonant by the continuous demands of emotional regulation during the pandemic.

This theme of dissonance aligns with Goffman’s (1959) concept of the front-stage and back-stage roles. On the front stage, Emily presents a composed and cheerful demeanor, while her back-stage reality is one of fear and stress. The tension between these two performances exacerbates her sense of alienation, not only from customers but also from her own emotions. As Shulman (2017) notes, modern workers must navigate complex layers of impression management, often blurring the boundary between their authentic selves and the personas required by their roles. Emily’s narrative highlights the urgent need to address the hidden emotional costs of hospitality work, especially during times of crisis.

Noga, a shift manager in a Tel Aviv restaurant, reflected on the pandemic’s impact on customer service: “At the beginning of the pandemic, I told my managers that all the things we learned about customer service should be erased, and we should start over. The personal connection with customers disappeared for over a year—it was all about distance. It’s like a doctor seeing a patient only over the phone or a psychologist doing therapy only on Zoom. The whole essence of service was redefined”. This shift fundamentally challenged the core principles of hospitality. In Noga’s experience, similar to what Raz (2002) theorized, cultural expectations in Tel Aviv shaped how workers navigated the shifting landscape of customer service, emphasizing the need to maintain connections despite the enforced distancing.

Interestingly, Noga’s comparison to doctors and psychologists, who also engage in compensated emotional labor, suggests that she perceives her work as similarly demanding. While Noga focuses on fulfilling aspects of her job, the pandemic’s emotional toll highlights the complex interplay between professional demands and personal fulfillment (Riley and Weiss 2016).

In another part of the interview, Noga described the personal toll of the pandemic: “I remember standing at some point and telling myself that I no longer have answers. I’m very used to being in control, to having answers, and suddenly I didn’t have any more answers, and this was related to two things. First, my mother became ill, so I had no answers there, and then the coronavirus, which were two things beyond my control, and that’s why I didn’t have answers. This realization came through work, and later I sought professional help (a psychologist) but also turned to studying Buddhism, which complements this in an amazing way”. Noga’s reflections suggest she equated emotional management with maintaining control, a theme that Shulman (2017) explores in his discussions on how individuals construct and maintain coherent identities amid shifting social expectations. This moment of vulnerability reveals the limitations of emotional control, particularly during crises that transcend personal and professional boundaries.

Karina, a bartender from Tel Aviv, noted the pandemic’s impact on her personality and communication style: “I think that… maybe it’s also because of my personality, but I felt that the issue of communication with people changed. On one hand, there was a strong desire to reconnect, to open up, and to chat with customers more than I used to. On the other hand, there was still this physical distance that we had to maintain, which is still felt”. Karina’s experience highlights the tension between her desire for genuine connection, heightened during the pandemic, and the need to adhere to safety protocols. This shift complicated her interactions with customers and likely affected her relationships with colleagues, as prolonged lockdowns and the bar’s temporary closure intensified the need for camaraderie. The enforced physical distance disrupted these bonds, further intensifying the emotional labor required to manage both her personal and professional roles.

Lena, a waitress from New Orleans, discussed the emotional strain caused by inconsistent communication from management: “It’s these constant changes… One day we’re doing it one way, the next day it’s different. You never know what to expect, and it makes you feel like you can’t trust anyone”. Lena’s remark, “you can’t trust anyone,” reflects the breakdown in trust caused by poor communication during the pandemic. The lack of clear guidance left workers feeling uncertain and unsupported, exacerbating their emotional strain.

From the perspective of Social Exchange Theory (SET), the emotional burnout experienced by Emily, Noga, Karina, and Lena can be understood as stemming from an imbalance in the reciprocal exchanges that typically underpin emotional labor. Workers usually receive positive reinforcement, such as customer appreciation or managerial support, as a reward for their emotional labor (Wang et al. 2022). However, the pandemic disrupted this balance, forcing workers to continue performing emotional labor without the usual rewards. In response, many had to rely on personal coping mechanisms to navigate the heightened emotional challenges, blending strategies that combined both personal and professional resilience.

Denver, a bartender from New Orleans, vividly described his struggle to manage the fear and emotional strain caused by the pandemic, as well as the limits of his coping strategies:

“It was around October [2021], and that was when they lifted the [citywide] mandate. They were going to open up the bars again and let people in. That shook me. I was like, ‘I don’t want to do it anymore,’ and I stopped. Because they [the management] are like, ‘Come set up at the bar inside where people are,’ which is fine. [The restaurant] wasn’t doing anything unsafe for the time period. I just wasn’t comfortable standing at the bar with a bunch of drunk people. Because the drunker people get, the more lax they become. And I was seeing that even with the little table, because I was very much like, ‘Don’t come close. Don’t touch my menu. No cash. Pay me with Venmo,’ and stuff like that. I didn’t want any physical interaction. I was like, ‘How can I still serve people and serve food without touching them at all?’ [….] They were like, ‘Come inside into this small, windowless bar,’ and I’m like, ‘I’m really not interested in that.’ So I left. Stopped doing that”.

Denver’s account highlights how the organizational environment—shaped by city mandates and managerial decisions—contributed to his decision to leave the business. Although the restaurant adhered to safety measures deemed appropriate for the time, Denver’s perception of risk in a small, windowless bar, coupled with his fear of customer behavior, amplified his emotional strain. This created a disconnect between his personal coping mechanisms and the organizational expectation to return to a high-risk, front-stage environment (Goffman 1959).

The lack of visible organizational interventions—such as offering alternative work arrangements or acknowledging workers’ emotional concerns—left Denver relying solely on personal strategies, including avoiding physical interactions and limiting touchpoints, to manage both the pandemic’s challenges and his emotional labor. However, these strategies were insufficient to address his fears, ultimately leading him to withdraw from his role entirely.

This example illustrates how workers’ personal coping mechanisms, while crucial, often fall short without adequate organizational support, especially during crises. The disruption in reciprocal exchanges between workers, management, and customers underscores the need for structural responses to alleviate the burdens of emotional labor.

In the next theme, we explore how these disruptions led hospitality workers to re-conceptualize their roles and relationships, highlighting how the pandemic reshaped the moral and practical dimensions of hospitality in a post-pandemic environment.

5.3. Theme 3: The Reconceptualization of Hospitality Between Altruism and Pragmatism

Yossi, a bar owner from Tel Aviv, described how he continued to employ foreign workers despite incurring financial losses: “They had nothing to eat... If you didn’t give them work, how were they supposed to live? We did it because we wanted to help them survive”. Yossi’s decision reflects a redefinition of social exchange, where the traditional economic transaction—providing a service in return for payment—was supplemented by a moral and social obligation. In this context, providing work transcends mere economic survival; it becomes a means of sustaining life and dignity. This is particularly significant for foreign workers, who have no legal status in Israel and are often left vulnerable (Kranz and Zubida 2019).

While Yossi’s words suggest a deep sense of moral responsibility, it is also possible that his actions were influenced by practical considerations. The pandemic led to significant disruptions in the hospitality workforce, as many workers left the industry due to job insecurity and health concerns (Baum et al. 2020). These widespread labor shortages may have necessitated Yossi’s decision to retain foreign workers, ensuring his business could remain operational. This dual motivation—combining moral obligations with economic necessity—complicates the interpretation of his actions and underscores the multifaceted nature of decision-making during crises.

A similar sentiment is evident in the words of Lea, another bar owner from Tel Aviv, who continued to hire foreign workers despite being robbed by some earlier in the pandemic: “I knew they had nothing to eat, and even though they had stolen from me, I couldn’t let them starve. They needed work to survive”. Lea’s actions reflect a profound sense of moral responsibility that transcends economic logic. However, as with Yossi, it is necessary to consider the potential influence of labor shortages on her decisions. The hospitality industry’s struggle to retain workers during the pandemic likely shaped Lea’s continued employment of these individuals, even in the face of difficult circumstances (Baum et al. 2020).

Tyler, a chef in New Orleans, reflected on the importance of maintaining relationships with local suppliers: “We made a conscious effort to keep buying from our local suppliers, even when it would have been cheaper to go with bigger distributors. It’s about supporting each other, especially when things are tough”. Tyler’s decision to prioritize local suppliers, despite not being an owner, demonstrates a notable level of compassion and community-oriented thinking. His actions, like those of Yossi and Lea, illustrate a redefinition of social exchange where maintaining relationships and supporting the community take precedence over cost-cutting measures. This emphasis on mutual support and reciprocity during a crisis mirrors the ethical dimensions of hospitality observed in other cases (Mathenge 2013).

In Tyler’s approach, supporting local suppliers goes beyond mere business transactions; it becomes an act of community solidarity. By choosing to support local businesses despite the potential for financial savings elsewhere, Tyler underscores that hospitality, especially during difficult times, is not just about serving customers but also about fostering a resilient and interconnected community. This reconceptualization of hospitality reflects a broader trend where the focus shifts from individual profit to collective well-being, aligning with the actions of Yossi and Lea, who also prioritized human connections and moral considerations of solidarity in their decisions during the pandemic.

John, a café owner from New Orleans, shared the satisfaction he derived from helping others through his involvement with the Chef Brigade program: “A source of support, the thing that saved me, was the Chef Brigade. I participated in that where I provided 100 meals three times a day… I did that for months alone… After a while, I convinced my employees to come in and help, and then the city started opening up. We had that going on plus the Chef Brigade, where we provided meals not to the homeless but to families”. John’s actions demonstrate a strong sense of solidarity and altruism, as he devoted significant time and resources to help others during the pandemic. However, his ability to later involve employees and expand operations suggests a pragmatic dimension, as these efforts likely supported his business’s recovery and reputation. This dualism of altruism and pragmatism reflects how acts of care can serve both ethical and practical purposes, further blurring the lines between these motivations.

In contrast, Alon, a waiter in a resto-bar in Tel Aviv, offered a critical perspective on the so-called altruism of hospitality owners: “I think they brought back around 50–60 percent of workers. The managers and chefs were a problem because they [the owners] pay us money. Waiters don’t get paid money, so for them, there’s no problem bringing them back to work. It’s much easier to bring back waiters than to bring back managers because you can’t pay the salary you give a manager, and you don’t know what’s coming next. You reduce the number of managers on a shift; we had 1–2 managers per shift. At some point, the role of checker was done only by the owners and partners. This is a place that’s only open in the evening, and the floor manager used to do 5 shifts a week. They tried to save wherever they could, which is also legitimate. The reduction, in the end, also harms you because when everything reopened, everyone was looking for employees, and to this day there’s a shortage of people because of all the unpaid leave. There’s a lack of waiters, a lack of managers, and an even greater shortage of managers. Many managers went to work in high-tech or stable jobs”.

Alon’s critique underscores the tension between owners’ claims of altruism and the pragmatic decisions they made to minimize costs. His perspective reveals how some workers perceived the owners’ actions as driven primarily by economic self-interest rather than genuine care for employees. This highlights the dualism inherent in the reconceptualization of hospitality during the pandemic: while owners like Yossi and Lea emphasized their moral responsibility, their actions were also shaped by practical concerns about maintaining their businesses. At the same time, Tyler’s compassion demonstrates that workers, too, engaged in acts of solidarity, further complicating the narrative of altruism versus pragmatism.

The quotes above highlight how emotional and moral dilemmas became central to social exchanges during the pandemic. This theme, reflected across various interviews, shows that acts of care and solidarity were not merely altruistic gestures but often carried pragmatic undertones. By expanding SET to include not only emotions such as empathy, satisfaction, and care but also practical considerations, these emotional and pragmatic resources served as valuable forms of currency in social interactions. The pandemic underscored the importance of positive exchanges—whether altruistic or pragmatic—in fostering community resilience and strengthening trust, both of which are critical for individual well-being and collective recovery during crises (Schilke et al. 2020).

6. Conclusions and Discussion

This study sought to address two key questions: (1) How did workers manage emotional labor and social exchanges during pandemic-induced disruptions? (2) How did cultural and organizational differences between Tel Aviv and New Orleans shape their experiences? It offers a comparative analysis of the hospitality industry in these two cities during the COVID-19 pandemic, focusing on the emotional management and labor of hospitality workers. By integrating Social Exchange Theory (SET) with the sociology of emotions, this research examines how individuals in the sector navigated pandemic-related challenges, uncovering shared themes despite distinct cultural and governance contexts.

Globalization and the influence of creative cities have contributed to a convergence in hospitality practices, which became evident as workers in both Tel Aviv and New Orleans adapted to the pandemic’s demands. As Lashley (2018) and Baum (2015) suggest, global standards in customer service and management likely diminished local differences, leading to uniform responses across diverse cultural settings. Consequently, workers in both cities faced similar challenges, as seen in three main themes: social and emotional distancing, emotional management in times of crisis, and the reconceptualization of hospitality.

The first theme, social and emotional distancing, captures how physical distancing measures disrupted traditional hospitality practices, weakening the personal connection central to service roles. In Goffmanian terms, the pandemic disrupted the “performance” of hospitality, as front-stage and back-stage roles shifted dramatically (Goffman 1959). Hospitality workers found themselves unable to perform familiar social scripts due to distancing protocols, which altered customer interactions and increased emotional labor demands. This disruption left workers struggling to balance their professional roles and personal fears, echoing Shulman’s (2017) insights into how modern impression management often blurs boundaries between personal and professional fronts.

The second theme, emotional management in times of crisis, explores the psychological toll of emotional labor during the pandemic. Drawing on Shulman’s (2017) and Hochschild’s ([1983] 2003) theories, it highlights how hospitality workers acted as both performers and spectators of their own emotional displays, forced to conceal genuine feelings behind professional facades. The pandemic heightened this emotional dissonance, as workers managed both visible and invisible risks, often leading to exhaustion and burnout. Raz’s (2002) research on emotional management in Israeli workplaces underscores how cultural expectations shape these emotional performances, often compelling workers to conform to organizational norms at the expense of their well-being. Further, Correia Leal et al. (2023) emphasize the critical role of surface acting—suppressing or faking emotions to align with organizational display rules—which can exacerbate emotional exhaustion and burnout.

The third theme, the reconceptualization of hospitality between altruism and pragmatism, highlights how the pandemic prompted a redefinition of hospitality as a blend of moral responsibility and pragmatic decision-making. While some owners, who also work on the premises, emphasized acts of altruism—such as retaining vulnerable workers or engaging in community-focused initiatives—these actions were often intertwined with practical considerations, such as addressing labor shortages and maintaining operational stability. Similarly, workers demonstrated solidarity by supporting local suppliers, showing that compassion extended beyond ownership. At the same time, critical perspectives of other workers reveal how some of them perceived owners’ actions as primarily driven by cost-cutting rather than genuine care. This dualism between altruism and pragmatism underscores the complexity of social exchanges during crises, where acts of care are shaped by both emotional and practical motivations. Expanding SET to include both empathy and pragmatism as exchange currencies highlights how these resources were valuable during a period of profound uncertainty.

However, as much as there were similarities, some differences emerged between the cities, shaped by their unique cultural and organizational contexts. In Tel Aviv, the focus on personal connection remained central despite physical distancing protocols, reflecting cultural norms that prioritize warmth, touch, and directness in service interactions. Workers in New Orleans, by contrast, often highlighted inconsistent communication from management as a significant source of strain, revealing a disconnect between organizational practices and worker needs. Additionally, while both cities exhibited solidarity among workers, New Orleans workers emphasized community-focused initiatives, whereas Tel Aviv workers frequently navigated organizational efforts to sustain operations amidst workforce shortages. These distinctions, which should be further studied, underscore the importance of cultural and structural factors in shaping the experiences of hospitality workers during crises.

The findings of this study provide key theoretical contributions to the fields of emotional labor and social exchange. By integrating SET with the sociology of emotions, the research highlights how emotional labor extends beyond to include moral and pragmatic dimensions, particularly in crisis contexts. It also underscores how cultural norms and organizational practices mediate the experience of emotional labor, offering insights into the interplay between individual resilience, moral responsibility, and professional demands. Moreover, the study moves beyond conventional critiques of emotional labor as purely alienating by integrating nuanced perspectives. As Grandey et al. (2015) point out, organizational rules governing emotional display often create environments where workers’ feelings are commodified for profit, leading to stress and burnout. However, this study reveals that in crisis contexts like the pandemic, some workers reimagined emotional labor not as alienating but as an integral part of their role, while others regarded their work in dual terms—both altruistic and pragmatic.

Practically, this study suggests actionable strategies for the hospitality industry to better support workers during future crises. Organizations should prioritize clear and consistent communication to reduce stress in times of crisis. Furthermore, initiatives that combine altruistic goals with practical needs, such as community-focused efforts, can strengthen organizational resilience while addressing worker well-being. These findings offer valuable lessons for creating more equitable and supportive environments in the hospitality sector.

7. Limitations and Future Studies

This study has several limitations that should be acknowledged. While it provides valuable insights into the experiences of food and beverage workers in Tel Aviv and New Orleans during the COVID-19 pandemic, it does not fully explore how employees’ personal exposure to the crisis influenced their capacity to perform emotional labor in the workplace. Additionally, the measures implemented by managers and team leaders to support employees in navigating emotional challenges during the pandemic were not directly examined. These gaps highlight opportunities for future research, particularly in investigating how personal and organizational responses to crises collectively shape emotional labor practices.

Furthermore, while the findings offer important perspectives on food and beverage workers, they do not encompass the broader hospitality industry, including sectors such as hotels, event management, and travel, which may have distinct characteristics and emotional labor demands. Future studies should expand the scope to include diverse hospitality contexts and assess the applicability of managerial support strategies across different industries. Addressing these areas will contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of emotional labor dynamics during crises and foster cross-industry insights.