If this position prevails, cargo owners will have to bear the costs of operational inefficiency.
Harold Daggett, President of the International Longshoremen’s Association (ILA), which represents longshoremen on the East Coast and Gulf of EE.UU., met on December 12 with the President-elect of EE.UU., Donald Trump, as part of the ongoing negotiations between the union organization and the United States Maritime Alliance (USMX), which represents port operators over the automation of port operations. The outcome of the meeting was incredibly successful for the ILA leader, after Trump expressed his full support for port workers in a post on his social media site, Truth Social, where he stated that automation threatens jobs and that foreign-based shipping companies (which largely control port operations) should invest in wages instead of machinery.
Trump, as is often the case, left no doubt about his position: “Foreign companies have made a fortune in EE.UU. by gaining access to our markets”, so “they should not be looking for every last penny knowing how many families are affected”, adding that “for the great privilege of accessing our markets, these foreign companies should hire our incredible U.S. workers, instead of laying them off and sending those profits to foreign countries”.
Once the support from the President-elect to the union organization became known, the USMX stated that they hope to work with Trump once he assumes the presidency (on January 20) “to improve worker safety, enhance port efficiency, increase port capacity, and strengthen our supply chains”, adding “the wages of ILA members increase the more goods they move, and the greater the capacity of our ports and the goods that are moved, means more money in workers’ pockets”.
However, it seems that beyond the logical arguments typical of the industrial sector for and against automation, following Trump’s gesture, the resolution of this matter will more likely unfold in the political arena. The ILA longshoremen appear to understand this issue in this way, as reflected in their statements following the public support they received from Donald Trump: “This contract goes beyond our ports: it is about supporting U.S. consumers and giving U.S. businesses access to the global market, from farmers to manufacturers, small businesses, and new innovative companies seeking new markets to sell their products”, said the union.
According to Jensen, “Cargo owners should take note of this struggle. To the extent that the lack of automation leads to a failure in increasing efficiency, this is a cost they will have to bear”.
Focusing on January 15
The retail and manufacturing sectors in EE.UU. are concerned about the possibility of port workers going on strike on January 15. It is worth remembering that longshoremen held a three-day strike in October after reaching an impasse with employers over wages. The labor stoppage led to the closure of major ports such as New York-New Jersey, Norfolk, Virginia, and Houston, and only ended after intervention from the Joe Biden administration. However, under pressure from the U.S. government, the USMX offered port workers a tentative 62% wage increase over six years, contingent on reaching a broader agreement by mid-January.
So far, the USMX maintains that greater use of technology is needed to handle growing cargo volumes through U.S. ports. Dennis A. Daggett, Executive Vice President of the ILA (pictured below with Donald Trump and Harold Daggett, President of the ILA), has stated that “these companies [port operators], who often have investments in ports and infrastructure around the world, may benefit from portraying U.S. ports negatively to push for automation and deregulation. This coordinated narrative overlooks the proven productivity of human-operated facilities, such as those in EE.UU., in favor of untested automation schemes”.
Source: MundoMarítimo
