Port Labor Deal Struck

Longshore union and shipping lines agree on a six-year contract. Bush hails accord as good for workers, employers and the American economy.

By Nancy Cleeland
Times Staff Writer

November 24 2002

After months of acrimony and costly showdowns that rippled through the national economy, the longshore union and shipping companies reached a deal late Saturday on a labor contract covering all U.S. commercial ports on the West Coast.

Details of the six-year contract were sketchy, but it was clear that both sides gave deeply while winning important concessions. Talks had intensified over the last week as senior federal mediator Peter J. Hurtgen pushed for a deal before the Thanksgiving holiday.

"I am very pleased that labor and management have reached an agreement concerning the West Coast ports," President Bush said in a statement, which was released by the White House as negotiators signed the deal in San Francisco. "This agreement is good for workers, good for employers and it's good for America's economy."

The agreement, which must be ratified by union members, was reached about one month before the expiration of a federal injunction that kept the ports open and operating normally.

Bush sought the court order last month under the Taft-Hartley Act after alleged union slowdowns and a 10-day management lockout created chaos on the waterfront and beyond.

The Taft-Hartley Act, which was last invoked in 1978, has rarely led to successful contracts, and instead often antagonizes both parties in the dispute, according to labor historians.

In this case, however, Hurtgen and two other federal mediators, along with AFL-CIO Secretary-Treasurer Richard Trumka, were credited with being moderating forces at the table.

The Pacific Maritime Assn., which represents about 80 shipping lines and terminal operators, came away with the right to implement labor-saving technology, such as computer systems that allow cargo lists to flow directly into terminals rather than being retyped by union clerks.

Those systems and other new equipment, such as optical scanners and remote cameras, will speed cargo movements while eliminating hundreds of high-wage clerical jobs. The industry had unsuccessfully sought such an agreement in the previous two contracts.

In turn, the International Longshore and Warehouse Union's 10,500 dockworkers won substantial increases in their pensions and held on to fully paid family health insurance, with large premium increases being absorbed completely by the employers.

The shipping group last month offered a pension that would have put maximum benefits at $50,000 a year. The union insisted on far more, up to $70,000 a year.

The final amount was not released Saturday, but was said to fall between the two proposals.

Wages increased moderately overall, although some skilled equipment operators will see large gains.

Negotiators for the union and shipping association signed the full contract in San Francisco about 10:30 p.m.

Hurtgen declined to discuss details of the plan until it is ratified by union members, but said it "provides substantial improvement in wages and benefits for the union's members."

"It also provides necessary technology and dispute resolution improvements needed to ensure that America's West Coast ports continue to modernize and increase in both efficiency and productivity," Hurtgen said in a statement.

The chief adversaries during the talks were James Spinosa, president of the International Longshore and Warehouse Union, and Joseph Miniace, president of the Pacific Maritime Assn.

At the first meeting with Hurtgen last summer, Spinosa stormed out of the federal building, incensed that Miniace had arrived with a pair of armed bodyguards. Miniace insisted that the bodyguards were warranted because he had received death threats.

Miniace, a seasoned and tough contract negotiator, had no maritime experience before being tapped for the maritime association's top job in 1995.

Union negotiators often complained that his hard-line approach in talks upset a long-standing friendly relationship between the union and management.

Several shipping company executives, however, said they had grown resentful of what they described as the union's sense of entitlement and refusal to accept new technology. They said they hired Miniace specifically to change the dynamic.

In a statement issued as the contract was signed, Miniace indirectly addressed those frictions.

"With this contract, we are ushering in a new era of modernization," he said. "It's also time to usher in a new era of mutual respect and trust between the PMA and ILWU."

Union officials could not be immediately reached for comment.

The contract represents a milestone that some compare to the 1960 Mechanization and Modernization Agreement, which was forged by the union's iconic longtime president, Harry Bridges.

That agreement allowed the industry to ship cargo in truck-sized containers that were loaded and unloaded by cranes, rather than the old, inefficient method of piling goods onto pallets.

Containerization eliminated thousands of union jobs and led to huge increases in productivity on the docks.

In exchange, Bridges wanted guarantees that all remaining jobs stayed in the union, and that union members shared in the new wealth.

Longshore wages increased dramatically as a result, and now ILWU members are among the highest-paid blue-collar workers in the nation.

According to the shipping association, annual wages range from about $80,000 to more than $150,000.

Please be informed that Carriers have announced Congestion Surcharges ranging from $110.00 - $600.00 for 20 ft containers and $220.00 - $1200.00 for 40 footers.  Final amounts and effective dates to be determined. Freight imported and exported to, from, and via West Coast Ports will be subject to the charge.  Depending upon the ocean carrier, these surcharges may begin as early as November 9 ^th.  Carriers are also imposing additional fees to deliver containers to the contracted destination points.  The carriers are complaining that “force majeure” circumstances are preventing them from performing, and thus freeing them to charge additional amounts to deliver the cargo. 

These surcharges will be due in addition to any and all ocean freight charges paid.

Please inform us immediately, if you wish to delay the shipping of any containers not yet departed from origin port.  Should you have any other questions, please feel free to contact our office.

Thank you for your cooperation and understanding in this matter.

Nik and Associates / NIK Transport, Inc.

NOVEMBER 02, 01:48 ET

Tentative Deal in Port Labor Talks

By JUSTIN PRITCHARD

Associated Press Writer

AP/Don Ryan

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — Both sides in the West Coast port labor dispute hailed a tentative agreement on computer technology use on the docks, but unresolved issues — and bitterness — remained.

Longshoremen and shipping companies reached the agreement Friday to track waterfront cargo more efficiently using technology that would make hundreds of union jobs obsolete. The two sides called it the first progress since a 10-day lockout of dockworkers last month shut down 29 major Pacific ports.

``The parties have worked long and hard,'' said federal mediator Peter Hurtgen. His statement said only that the deal concerned ``the key issues of new technology and retention of union's jurisdiction for marine clerk work.''

While the issue of technology was the major sticking point in the negotiations, pensions and arbitration still separate the two sides. But both sides have said once technology is resolved, the other issues should fall into place.

Shipping companies are seeking to modernize ports to use computerized records of what cargo is stacked where on each vessel and in each yard. Often that information is already in electronic form when the cargo is loaded at another Pacific Rim port, but clerks now retype the data — slowing the movement of cargo but preserving union positions.

With Hurtgen's prodding, both sides agreed union clerks wouldn't have jurisdiction over cargo planning on vessels, though they would be involved in planning on the docks and in rail yards. Also, the union dropped its demand for minimum manning levels at some waterfront positions. Other details were still sketchy.

``Obviously that is a positive development, and we continue to urge the parties to work together in good faith to resolve their remaining differences for the sake of the economy and jobs,'' White House spokesman Scott McClellan said.

AP/Jean-Marc Bouju

******News from West Coast Waterfront Coalition*******

1.  Negotiations:  The two sides have been meeting under the supervision of the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service (FMCS).  Meetings occurred on October 29 and are scheduled for today as well.  These meeting include the "technology committee," but we have no real information about any progress.  We do know that the main issues separating the two sides continues to be "jurisdiction."  By this we mean that the ILWU has asked that all new technology jobs (even some that PMA's members consider management positions) come under the jurisdiction of the ILWU.  This is a very serious issue for labor, who believes that job security for existing jobs is not sufficient -- they must have some guarantee that future jobs will be unionized.  For those of you with a management perspective, this may seem absurd, but it is a VERY real and emotional issue for the union.

2.  ILWU Responds to Justice . . .

As you all know, the Justice Department gave the ILWU until Tuesday to respond to PMA's allegations that workers were "slowing down" the ports and therefore violating the court order.  Late Tuesday the ILWU responded to Justice, and has countered that the PMA is the source of any and all disruptions at the port.  In addition the union, in its letter (here is the link to the PDF file:

In any case, despite the Union's allegations that the Justice Department is "biased," the union raises some issues that the Justice and possibly Judge Alsup will want to explore, such as safety.  It's not clear what remedies the court may impose if they determine that either side has not lived up to the court order.

3.  Understanding Congressional Action

I've been asked by several of you to outline what might be involved in congressional action should the dispute go beyond 80 days.  As some of you know legislation has been introduced that would extend the Taft-Hartley deadline by thirty days.  Other legislation has been introduced by friends of organized labor that would eliminate all future Taft-Hartley injunctions altogether.  So it's fair to say that all sides are thinking about legislative action.  But the reality here is that congressional action on anything related to this dispute is going to be nearly impossible to achieve.  Here's why.  Although you can move legislation through the House with a straight majority vote, the rules in the Senate are considerably different.  Anyone who's ever seen the old movie "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington," knows that any Senator can "filibuster" a bill by talking it to death.  A large group of Senators -- say the majority of one party-- can keep a filibuster going for some time.  Any legislation regarding organized labor will be partisan in the extreme, which means that each side will have about 50 votes and a filibuster is almost inevitable. It takes 60 votes in the Senate to cut off debate and end a filibuster. This is a very high hurdle.   More important, it would take months to achieve.

So, I think it's important for everyone to understand that the best solution to this situation is a good agreement between the two private parties.  If we get to December 27 without an agreement, we could see additional disruptions, but there is very little that the government (Congress or the President) can do now about those disruptions. Consequently, I would urge shippers to take whatever contingencies they can.

ILWU and AFL-CIO message to PMA and Bush:

You are not going to take this waterfront away from us!

by Evelina Alarcon

Nearly 2000 members packed into longshore Local 13's general membership meeting Oct. 22, eager to hear an update on the longshore division contract fight. AFL-CIO Secretary-Treasurer Richard Trumka, ILWU International President James Spinosa and Local 13 President Ramon Ponce De Leon exhorted the crowd to keep fighting. "Our mode is 'you are not going to take this waterfront away from us-we are going to win," said Spinosa, who got a standing ovation when he rose to speak.

"We've gone far beyond the contract," Spinosa said. "The employers want to destroy our union and take control of the waterfront. Corporate America and greed are at our doorstep.

"Now, under Taft-Hartley, they are setting the stage to bankrupt the union. They have the media, the President and the courts set up to get us.

"What do we do?" he asked. "We do what we do best. We have to think outside the box and outsmart them. We've got Trumka and the AFL-CIO, we have friends around the world and a good negotiating team. The one thing they cannot take away from us is our solidarity. "You've gotta do your job and not allow the PMA to beat us in the courts," he said. "Stay on the job. They can't beat us if we stay on the job because we are protecting our job." Trumka, who worked with the United Mine Workers Union of America (UMWA) when it faced the Taft-Hartley Act in 1978 and won, pledged to do everything humanly possible to meet the ILWU's needs.

Referring to the UMWA's 1978 fight, Trumka said, "We struck for 118 days and we won because we stuck together. "We know two things for sure. First, that the PMA and shippers are going to continue to try to conquer us by dividing us, and second, that as long as we continue to reject their scheming and we stand together, we will win."

Trumka blasted President Bush for being "incredibly aggressive" in interfering in collective bargaining and stressed the meaning of the ILWU battle to the rest of labor. "Bush knows that if he can bring this union down, the rest will be easy for him," Trumka said. "But on the other hand, when this union stands him down-and you will-Bush will think twice about taking on another union."

Trumka also talked about labor's stakes in the November elections and congratulated the ILWU for sending 35 members to five states to participate in close electoral campaigns there. "This election will determine who will control all three branches of the Federal government," he said. "It will decide whether Bush can interfere in negotiations or not. You are showing incredible solidarity by sending your members across the country while you face this battle on the waterfront."

The 35 volunteers from the West Coast locals had just received training in Los Angeles and were on their way the next day to Minnesota, Missouri, Texas, Colorado and Arkansas. The 35 were asked to take the stage and they were greeted by a standing ovation from the members.

Dave Arian, public relations chair for the negotiating committee, gave a round-up of the strategy for this stage of the fight. Rob Remar, one of the ILWU's lawyers, made a presentation on Taft-Hartley. Local 13 members peppered their leaders and the lawyer with questions after the speeches, but also expressed appreciation for the information.

"The meeting renewed my spirit," said UTR driver Robin Mahaley. "It reinforced my feeling about the need to educate our friends and neighbors about our fight, and I appreciate that we will be doing that." "Now I know what our guys are doing," said Brett Bozeman. "It was very educational and I know that our guys are on the ball. There is also more solidarity than I knew." "I am very stressed, but this meeting was very informative and gave us a lot of knowledge," UTR driver Mona Briseno said.

Members let their re-charged spirits rip with a rousing ovation at the end of the meeting when Spinosa, Trumka and the Local 13 officers left the stage.

 *************News from West Coast Waterfront Coalition*****************

This just in . . .

Yesterday PMA filed papers with the Justice Department alleging that the ILWU has engaged in slowdowns since October 9, the date of the court order reopening the ports.  PMA is charging that these slowdowns have occurred in every major port on the West Coast and that these slowdowns are in contravention of the court order.  Below you will find PMA's press release, as posted on its webpage with resepect to this issue.  How this is likely to affect negotiations, which are supposed to start today, is anyone's guess.  But I'm guessing it would be particularly helpful.  It's also not clear what, if anything, the Justice Department or Judge Alsup will do with these allegations.

HERE IS PMA's PRESS RELEASE:

PMA Documents Significant Drop in Waterfront Productivity Coast Wide;

Forwards Detailed Information to U.S. Justice Department

SAN FRANCISCO, Calif. (October 23, 2002) ? Since the West Coast ports reopened under a Federal Court order on October 9, the International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILWU) has engaged in a concerted, systematic work slowdown impacting productivity at every major port. These debilitating actions by the Union come despite a Court requirement to resume work at a normal and reasonable rate of speed.

The Pacific Maritime Association has documented these significant declines in productivity and has forwarded information to the United States Department of Justice for review.

Productivity reports compiled by PMA and its member companies demonstrate that during the first week back to work under the Taft-Hartley injunction, container move productivity fell 34% in Oakland, 29% in Portland, 27% in Seattle, 19% in Tacoma, and 9% in Los Angeles/Long Beach.

These productivity figures are based on gross container moves per hour -- a direct, objective measure -- in comparison to historical data correlated to specific vessels and terminals.

"The ILWU is playing games with the U.S. economy, and inflicting economic pain and hardship on scores of companies and their employees," said PMA President and CEO Joe Miniace. "Given the extreme urgency of keeping the goods moving through our ports, I cannot fathom why the Union would deliberately take these slowdown actions."

As indicated by the experience at the Port of Tacoma, the Union has the capacity to move cargo at or near normal rates when it determined to do so. On the first shift back after the Court entered the Temporary Restraining Order (the night shift on Wednesday, October 9), Tacoma had gross container move productivity of 92.6%. On the next shift, Wednesday morning October 10, Tacoma experienced even higher productivity, at 95.1% of normal levels. That night, the ILWU held a membership meeting in Tacoma. The days following the meeting, productivity fell to 81.7% on Thursday, October 11, to 55.0% for Friday, October 12, and 52.8% on Saturday, October 13.

The ILWU has repeatedly offered several excuses for the drop in productivity. These include an assertion of congestion, safety issues, and the need for more labor. Those claims, taken separately or together, do not account for the sudden and major drop in work levels at four major ports, and are discredited by the fact productivity levels at certain terminals have ranged from 90% to 100% of normal. d

Not only are container moves down substantially, but numerous other indicators demonstrate a substantial failure to return to work at a normal and reasonable rate. The following examples are drawn from the week of October 9 to 16, though early indications show that similar activities are continuing through the present.

Failing to Fill Gangs.

The Union has only partially filled "gangs" of workers. On numerous occasions, the gang of workers was short one or two skilled positions, typically a hook checker or a Clerk Supervisor. Those shortages have resulted in the entire gang being returned to the dispatch hall and performing no work. "By withholding critical labor, the Union made it impossible to run normal operations," Miniace said.

In Seattle, for most of the first week, the number of gangs being worked had to be reduced by at least one-third due to there simply not being enough longshore and clerk workers reporting for work to the shifts. In Seattle, the Union typically dispatches 16 to 19 gangs of workers on the day side shift. Yet, in the first week since entry of the Court's Order, the ILWU dispatched only 8 to 13 gangs on the day shift.

Slow Dispatch

The PMA analysis reveals that the Union's dispatch operation has been especially slow. Union workers, especially Clerks, consistently report to the job site one hour or even over an hour after the start of the job. On numerous occasions, skill jobs do not fill, or fill quite late in the dispatch process. Jobs for hook checkers, Clerk Supervisors, and semi-drivers have been unfilled, or only filled late in the dispatch, day after day in several of the major ports. This results in labor reporting late to the job, and decreased production.

"Sick" Days

On several occasions, Clerks left work soon after starting, reporting that they were sick. For example, on Monday, October 14, one of the PMA member companies in Southern California ordered four gate Clerks. Just as the shift was starting, three of the four gate Clerks said they were sick and left the jobsite. This caused major problems for the terminal operator, and cut in half the number of gate moves on that shift.

The overall productivity figures differ by shift and by port for the first week of operation.

In Long Beach, the first shift productivity was down 6.6%, and the second shift productivity is down 7.7%.

In Los Angeles, the first shift productivity was down 14.5%, while the second shift is down 4.1%.

In Oakland, gross container moves per hour performed on the first shift were off 37% from the normal level. On the second shift, productivity was off 31%.

In Portland, first shift productivity was down 28.6%; second shift was down 29.5%.

In Tacoma, first shift productivity was off 22.9%, while second shift was off 13.8%.

In Seattle, productivity on the first shift was down 34%. Second shift productivity there was off 21%.

The economic impact of continuing to limp along at one-fifth to one-third down in productivity is staggering, ranging from the loss of millions of dollars in revenues to the shippers and terminal operators and stevedore companies, to continued delays in loading and unloading of the cargo of thousands of customers, to continued concerns about perishable goods and holiday deliveries and the negative drag on the economy.

The Union's refusal to return to work at a normal and reasonable rate of speed has meant that the massive backlog of cargo and ships has not been substantially reduced. From October 9 to October 21, the number of dry cargo vessels at Los Angeles/Long Beach declined by only one ship ? 101 to 100 ? while the overall number of ships in West Cost ports remained close to 200: a total of 194 ships, compared with 224 twelve days earlier.

NOTE FROM NIK - Be sure to visit

TEMPORARY U.S. WEST COAST CONGESTION SURCHARGE

Effective date: Nov/17/2002

All cargo originated or discharged via U.S. West Cast ports is subject to a Temporary West Coast Congestion Surcharge (TWCS) of

USD 500 / 20', USD 1000/ other container size.

This charge is to be paid together with the ocean freight.