Steve Quayle News Alerts

Oct. 2, 2002
By Martin Wolk

Representatives of unionized dockworkers and cargo shipping lines met with a federal mediator Thursday for the first time since talks abruptly broke off Tuesday. But the two sides expressed little hope for an early end to the bitter contract dispute that has idled 10,500 workers and added to the woes of the struggling U.S. economy. Here is a quick look at some of the key issues in the dispute.

IS IT A STRIKE, OR A LOCKOUT?

A lockout, although the International Longshore & Warehouse Union has posted what it describes as “informational” picket lines at the 29 affected ports, from Seattle to San Diego.
The Pacific Maritime Association, which represents shippers, began locking out workers Sept. 30 and says it will not reopen the ports until the union agrees to extend its contract. The latest three-year contract expired July 1, but the union had agreed to numerous temporary extensions until Sept. 2.
(Even President Bush has shown some confusion over the shutdown. In response to a reporter’s question this week, he said: “This is a — any strike’s a tough situation, but this one happens to come at a — or a lockout is a tough situation, or no work is a tough situation.”)

West Coast ports were shut down on Sunday after port operators blamed dockworkers for a months-long campaign of work slowdowns. The lockout, which is costing the national economy $1 billion a day, will lead to even more serious economic repercussions if ports remain closed through the week. The ports handle half of the nationís imports and exports.

Who are the players?
The International Longshore and Warehouse Union: The 10,500-member union controls all dock work on the West Coast, including crane operations. Annual pay for members ranges from $80,000 to $158,000. The ILWU has been working without a contract with the ports since July 1.

Pacific Maritime Association: The group represents West Coast port operators and international shipping lines. The association closed the ports on Sept. 30 after saying that an ILWU work slowdown was paralyzing operations.

Where is the lockout?
The lockout covers all 29 ports operated by the Pacific Maritime Association along the West Coast. The ports handle $300 billion in cargo a year and include Long Beach, Los Angeles, Seattle and Oakland. Many of the ports are designed to accommodate massive container ships from Asia. The ships are too large to be diverted through the Panama Canal.

Why is there a lockout?
The lockout comes after the ILWU engaged in several months of work slowdowns. Longshoremen refused to work overtime and created schedules in which workers skilled in one job were assigned to different jobs. The slowdown stems from disagreements between the ILWU and the Pacific Maritime Association over pensions and benefits as well as the associationís desire to use new technologies such as cargo scanners to speed cargo handling. The association says that new technology is required to reduce bottlenecks. The ILWU has said it is willing to negotiate if a new contract sets minimum port staffing levels and enables the union to have jurisdiction over all new technology jobs. The association has resisted those demands.

What's next?
The Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service has made overtures to help resolve the dispute, although the ILWU has said that the federal government favors the employers. If the lockout continues, the government may reopen the ports through a mandatory cooling-off period, a tactic last used in 1978 during a coal strike. The last major dispute at West Coast ports was a 134-day longshoremen-led strike in 1971. The Pacific Maritime Association says it will open its ports when the ILWU agrees to resume work. The ILWU refuses to consider any options until the lockout ends.

WHY DID SHIPPERS CLOSE THE PORTS?

The shippers say they were forced to stop operations after a work slowdown they described as the equivalent of a “strike with pay.” Union officials have acknowledged slowing operations by refusing to work overtime and adhering to contractual restrictions in a “work to rule” job action.
Union officials also say they have put a premium on safety after five workers were killed on the job over the past seven months in what a spokesman called “the biggest speedup in the history of West Coast ports.”

WHAT IS THE DISPUTE ALL ABOUT?

The central issue in the negotiations is management’s desire to make use of new technology, including computerized information systems to track cargo. Longshoremen, who can make upwards of $100,000 a year, want to ensure that any new technology-related jobs are unionized.
The two sides also are at odds over pensions, but technology is the major sticking point.

ISN’T TECHNOLOGY AN ARCANE ISSUE FOR A STRIKE?

The contract language at issue is “very arcane” but also very important, says Jason Greenwald, a spokesman for the maritime association. “What we’re talking about for the most part is the ability to implement technology and have a process in place to have technology brought in.”
Union officials say the technology issue is a fig leaf for the shippers to outsource new work to non-union workers. “This is not about technology — this is about busting the union,” said Steve Stallone, a spokesman for the union.
The shippers have guaranteed that every current union member will have a job for life. But the union is fighting for more: to preserve future jobs and to retain significant control over the supply of labor on the docks.

IS TECHNOLOGY A NEW ISSUE FOR THE DOCKWORKERS?

Not at all. The two sides have recognized the impact of technology since the 1950s, when increased mechanization allowed bulk items like grain to be loaded directly out of storage silos rather than by hand. In the early 1960s a landmark agreement on “mechanization and modernization” was signed that helped pave the way for along period of relative labor peace.
In the most recent contracts, signed in 1996 and 1999, the two sides agreed to work together on new technology and “there has been significant introduction of automation on the waterfront,” said David Olson, a professor of political science at the University of Washington.
But with trans-Pacific trade expected to double over the next 10 years, and most West Coast ports unable to expand physically, more automation will be needed so ships can minimize the amount of time spent in port.

WHAT IS THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF THE SHUTDOWN?

A study commissioned by the maritime association puts the impact at $934 million a day at the beginning, although the costs rise quickly. As the port shutdown goes on it will begin to have ripple effects on factories and other “just-in-time” facilities that are unable to obtain needed parts and supplies. Within 10 days, a work stoppage could cost the economy more than $19 billion, and after 20 days the costs rises to $48.6 million according to the study by Martin Associates, a maritime consulting firm.
“Those figures may be a bit high,” said Keitaro Matsuda, senior economist at Union Bank of California. But he agrees that a long shutdown could have a serious impact, particularly on holiday retail sales.
“Consumer spending has been the only thing keeping our economy growing, so if that weakens for any reason that would be a negative for the whole economy,” he said.
The work stoppage also could have a “serious backwards ripple effect on the Asian economy,” said John Martin, president of the consulting firm.

WHAT INDUSTRIES ARE MOST AFFECTED?

Manufacturing, retailing and agriculture. Already an auto manufacturing plant in Fremont, Calif., has shut down production, potentially idling 5,000 workers. The so-called NUMMI plant, a joint venture of General Motors and Toyota, makes the Chevrolet Prizm, Toyota Corolla and Toyota Tacoma pickup trucks.
Even though businesses have had at least three months to prepare for the shutdown, the fragile economic environment has made many retailers unable or unwilling to accumulate heavy inventories. In addition, much of the affected cargo is seasonal, and some is perishable.

WHAT CAN THE GOVERNMENT DO?

Some industry officials and members of Congress have urged President Bush to invoke the Taft-Hartley Act and get the cargo moving again.
Under the 1947 law, Bush can ask the courts to halt the work stoppage for an 80-day cooling off period. But such a maneuver would be neither quick nor easy.
Experts suggest it would take at least a week for a presidential board of inquiry to compete its required fact-finding process. Then courts would have to order management to reopen the gates, a prospect that is far from assured.
In the past, courts generally have backed the president and ordered such injunctions. But most, if not all, of those cases were strikes. Labor lawyers could not recall any cases where a president invoked Taft-Hartley authority over a lockout.
In any case, an 80-day cooling-off period would hardly guarantee any lessening of tensions in a dispute that already has seen the union walk out of negotiations to protest the presence of armed guards hired by management.
“This one is going to end up at the collective bargain table, whether it is 80 days from now, eight months from now or eight days from now,” said Olson.

http://www.msnbc.com/news/816688.asp