Skip to main content

labor Simmering Labor Fight Brings Crippling Delays to West Coast Seaports

"...owners said they would suspend the unloading of container and other cargo ships on Thursday, Monday and the weekend because of what they called "a strike with pay." The move followed a similar two-day limit on work last weekend that angered many port workers. They saw it as a ploy to punish them and increase pressure to settle on a new labor contract after nine months of negotiations, which continue with the aid of a federal mediator."

A cargo ship at the Port of Los Angeles, where, owners said, they will suspend the unloading of container and other cargo ships.,Monica Almeida

Simmering Labor Fight Brings Crippling Delays to West Coast Seaports

Readers Comments

 

Simmering Labor Fight Brings Crippling Delays to West Coast Seaports

LOS ANGELES -- The container ships arrive here filled with appliances, toys, apparel, auto parts, computer components and untold other products from Asia, to head out to stores and factories across America.

But a simmering labor dispute between the longshoremen's union and shipowners has brought crippling delays here and to other West Coast seaports. And the slowdown escalated this week as owners said they would suspend the unloading of container and other cargo ships on Thursday, Monday and the weekend because of what they called "a strike with pay."

The move followed a similar two-day limit on work last weekend that angered many port workers. They saw it as a ploy to punish them and increase pressure to settle on a new labor contract after nine months of negotiations, which continue with the aid of a federal mediator.

It seems certain to worsen the congestion at the West Coast ports, which together handle half of the container traffic entering the United States, including at the vast Los Angeles-Long Beach complex here and at ports in Oakland, Seattle and Tacoma, Wash. Manufacturers and farmers who rely on timely and predictable trans-Pacific trade fear even more serious disruptions.

If you like this article, please sign up for Snapshot, Portside's daily summary.

(One summary e-mail a day, you can change anytime, and Portside is always free.)

Dockworkers waited on Tuesday to be called for jobs at the Local 13 Longshore Workers Dispatch Hall in Los Angeles. Credit Monica Almeida/The New York Times

"The continued intransigence by labor and management to reach a new contract is unacceptable," the National Retail Federation said in response to the latest report. "This stalemate is hurting American businesses, their employees and consumers."

It called on the White House to push for a settlement, as did the U.S. Chamber of Commerce on Thursday.

Workers and management offer diametrically opposed explanations for the delays. The shipowners say that workers in some ports have significantly slowed their work in the last few months, and that the union local here in Southern California has hampered operations since November with new limits on who may operate cranes.

For several weeks, though, citing congestion in the yards, the owners have limited night-shift activities, with no unloading of ships, reducing the nighttime payroll. "The employers are deliberately worsening the existing congestion crisis to gain the upper hand at the bargaining table," Robert McEllrath, president of the International Longshore and Warehouse Union, said of the limits on unloading vessels.

The owners must pay wage premiums for night shifts and time and a half for work on holidays and weekends, on a base rate of about $36 per hour for many seasoned longshoremen. Under the union contract, Thursday (Lincoln's Birthday) and Monday (Washington's Birthday) are holidays.

Although the owners are suspending the unloading of ships on these two days as well as the weekend, they will allow terminals to continue with activities to move containers from their yards onto trucks and trains.

Last week, the owners, dominated by huge Chinese, Danish, Taiwanese and other companies, made public what they called a generous contract offer. On Wednesday, the Pacific Maritime Association, which is negotiating on behalf of the owners, said the longshoremen's union had responded to that offer "with demands they knew we could not meet" -- in particular, a demand for a unilateral right to fire arbitrators when the contract ends.

The statement added, "What they're doing amounts to a strike with pay, and we will reduce the extent to which we pay premium rates for such a strike."

On Thursday, 14 container ships were anchored outside the conjoined ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. Newly arrived ships have been waiting a week or two before they can enter a terminal where looming hammerhead cranes will heft their cargoes onto shore.

Until last fall, container ships, which have carefully scripted schedules, virtually never had to anchor offshore at this harbor, said Capt. J. Kip Louttit, executive director of the Maritime Exchange, a private group that monitors ship movements here. The five-mile-wide harbor takes in 33 percent of the nation's containerized imports. With unloading suspended, he said, the number waiting for a berth will climb.

The businesses that depend on Pacific trade for parts, products or sales are starting to feel the pinch. California citrus growers have lost $500 million in export business since November because containers now sit for an intolerable 10 days at the pier before being loaded, according to California Citrus Mutual, a trade association in Exeter.

Longshoremen at the dispatch hall for Local 13, which has 2,000 members. A labor dispute between the longshoremen's union and ship owners has led to delays in Los Angeles and  other West Coast seaports. Credit Monica Almeida/The New York Times

When the owners, in a surprise move, temporarily suspended the unloading of ships last weekend, they said they had done so because they were tired of paying overtime wages for sluggish work and because they had to focus on clearing out a backlog of containers in overflowing yards.

The union hired a small plane and distributed aerial photographs showing empty tracts in the purportedly clogged yards. "They are trying to create a situation to focus pain on longshoremen," Richard Montez, a certified crane operator, said when he heard about the latest cutbacks. "They just don't want to pay overtime dollars."

"Instead of trying to ease the situation and get back to the norm, they're causing more grief," he said. "I have a family. I want to work."

In the case of the Los Angeles and Long Beach ports, the owners say the November decision by the union local to stop some 500 experienced, but uncertified, yard-crane operators from filling that linchpin role is to blame for the delays. The union says it made the decision for safety reasons, while the owners call it an indirect slowdown.

"There are not enough crane operators, period, to work continuously as we have in the past," James C. McKenna, president and chief negotiator of the maritime association, said on Tuesday. On a typical day, the association says, the union provides far fewer operators than employers want, constricting all operations.

In one of many clashing narratives, union leaders deny this, saying that they have men and women qualified to meet any work demands, and that many certified crane operators are not even working full time.

"There's no logical reason not to be working seven days a week around the clock," said Bobby Olvera Jr., president of the union's Local 13 here, which has 2,000 members.

The owners, Mr. McKenna said, had agreed to raise the base hourly wage for senior skilled workers, now $35.68, to $40.68 over five years, an annual increase of about 3 percent. Most workers also receive overtime and shift and skills premiums that take the average current wage to more than $50 per hour, the maritime association said. The owners would also continue to provide a health plan with no co-payments and generous pensions.

The union has declined to discuss the negotiations.

Mr. McKenna has warned darkly of an "imminent collapse" of port operations, causing wide havoc and driving more shippers to other routes.

The union calls that a threat of a lockout, which occurred in 2002, prompting federal intervention under the Taft-Hartley Act. But the union, which insists that the parties are near agreement, says it has made no plans for a strike, which last happened in 1971.

Mr. McKenna said he was not forecasting a lockout, but a system so gridlocked that owners would have to suspend operations. "A lockout is a last resort -- nobody wins," he said. "But at some point in time, this thing will grind itself to a stop, and I wouldn't take anything off the table."

Readers Comments

RE: Right-to-Work Laws are Every Republican Union-Hater's Weapon of Choice

This is a well written piece.

Fundamentally right to work laws are passed by business oriented politicians who oppose unions. But unions are fundamental to democracy. The right to organize a union leads to the right to collective bargaining. And the right to collective bargaining is the right to negotiate the terms and conditions of work with an employer. Without unions you have business autocracy. This is clear in the non-union sector today where large corporations pay the lowest wages possible and no benefits, no regular hours, no pensions. Many people today have to work at several jobs just to get by and they are so exhausted they have little time for recreation, political activity, family life or anything else. The current labor relations in the U.S. today are a disgrace and getting worse. If the situation does not improve, the US will become a business autocracy (it is close to that now) or there will develop a grassroots social movement that will change the power structure. When people get to the point of anger or where they cannot live under current conditions, they react. We have seen this in Greece recently and hopefully will see it in Spain. If Europe can begin to change, so can the U.S. And one way to bring about change is to make it easier not tougher for unions to organize workers.

L. MacDowell

RE: Group Appeals Mandatory Union Fees to Supreme Court

This is nonsense in this day and age, and reflects the conservative attack on unions for the last 35 years. Unions between 1945 and 1980 helped create the richest working class in the world. The backlash from companies then started and now no one but the superrich is doing well. Workers and middle class people are all doing worse.

Last week the Supreme Court of Canada issued a landmark decision, holding that the right to strike is constitutionally protected. The Supreme Court held that the right to strike is an essential part of a meaningful collective bargaining process in our system of labour relations.

L. MacDowell