Butting heads

An almost irreconcilable problem of immovable objects meeting irresistible forces dogs the future of terminal operators and dockside labour practices and organisation in the US.

The irresistible force is the drive for greater efficiency and productivity and the immovable object is the unionised dockside labour. The two trade unions that control the labour market are feeling the strongest pressures of the last 20 years for greater productivity and see themselves as being stealthily pushed aside by ports and operators contracting with individual groups of workers, particularly in breakbulk, and unions outside the remit of the International Longshoremen’s Association and the International Longshore and Warehouse Union.

The general opinion of analysts and consultants is that the unions are shifting their tactics to make sure that where they do have control, other unions do not encroach on their responsibilities. This is particularly evident in highly technical trades.

Sensitive touch

Labour relations are the most sensitive topic in the country’s maritime industry and industry leaders are fearful of being named publicly.

Says the manager of one West Coast terminal: “We are coming up to the renewal of the six-year contract for the ILWU and the situation is certainly tense. The issue of non-ILWU unions is one of the main sources of controversy and has become increasingly important.”

Terminal operators will not admit, openly or privately, that they would like to strike deals with outside groups, even if these are unionised, but the consensus is towards this trend. The reason is that pay rates for the ILWU are higher than those for other unions, even though these unions might be more skilled.

“With bottom lines being threatened like never before, we are being extremely hard pushed,” says an operator. “The lines are under pressure, spare capacity is evident everywhere and ports are finding that service strings are trying to cajole or persuade them to lower terminal fees. The establishment of the P3 etc. has made it tougher. If the P3 doesn’t call at your port, all of a sudden you can lose two customers immediately.”

Taking responsibility

On the West Coast, operators are on their guard over a repeat of the ILWU’s success in getting the responsibility for all operations at Oakland’s new, consolidated Outer Harbour terminal. “The union shouted and screamed that it should be responsible for the task of raising crane heights,” says a San Francisco consultant, “even though specialist outside contractors have always done that job. It’s not something that any old longshore worker can do. For some unfathomable reason, the arbitrator who was called in agreed with the ILWU. The result – no one who could do the job. So they have to call in the outside people, and it becomes even more expensive.”

A manager at a West Coast terminal operator that also does business at Oakland says that one of the difficulties with the port is that there is a thin layer of specialist ILWU workers. “If there is a spike in ship calls we find there are shortages of computer clerks and other technical personnel. This has been slowing down operations. The people in Local 10 don’t even use smartphones. Another difficulty is that the dispatch hall is in San Francisco, so it takes time for people to get to us. So much so that if we want a 6 am start, they only arrive at 6.45.”

The San Francisco consultant notes that the average age of Oakland dockers is markedly older than that of Southern California ports. “They are set in their ways and are not up with latest technology. Southern California is where all the growth has been and where the younger dockers go.”

There is concern in California over Oakland’s stagnation, with container traffic remaining so flat. But the port does garner respect from the international community. “Efficiency there is about equal to the rest of the West Coast,” says Dean Davison, principal consultant at Ocean Shipping Consultants. “There are good operators at the terminal level and they certainly know their stuff.” He says that one possible drag on productivity is that the port might not be able to capitalise on economies of scale to the same degree as southern California.

“But you cannot stress it enough that there must be an improvement in port productivity everywhere and has to be manageable improvement.”

Truck trials

One labour problem that has been solved at Oakland is the hostility from the hundreds of container vehicles servicing the port. Their grievance lay in not having enough money to buy or lease new vehicles which would comply with new anti-pollution regulations.

“Oakland politics came into play,” says an analyst. “Community action groups got involved, as most of the drivers are Latinos with very little money. Unlike Los Angeles and Long Beach, there is a deep abhorrence of the possibility of large funding institutions lending money and there was some agitation for a cooperative scheme. It took place when the Occupy movement got going, but has now died down and sense has prevailed. Truck emissions have been greatly reduced and everyone is happier.”

Where operators and employers are distinctly unhappy at Oakland is in the bureaucratic and inflexible attitude of the federal Customs and Border Protection agency, which could mean that the dockworkers are blamed unfairly. “Customs see their job as mostly guarding against terrorism, with helping the free flow of goods as secondary,” says a terminal executive. “We can’t seem to get them to open extra gate lanes at night at peak periods.”

This problem is evident on a smaller scale at the larger ports, according to one observer. “That is the nature of a government bureaucracy, although at LA/Long Beach customs officials are more aware of the peaks that occur – largely due to the existence of PierPass.”

Oakland’s new executive director, Chris Lytle, says: “There is good news to report as the latest (Congressional) omnibus bill includes funding for additional CBP officers that will help all the ports, including Oakland.

“Without sufficient advance notice, CBP cannot always accommodate a last minute request to change staffing. We have been meeting with CBP. They have expressed and demonstrated a willingness to address this issue and be as flexible as possible within their staffing and budget constraints. It is a challenge when there is an influx of cargo coming through the Port outside the normal operating window.

“CBP has consistently done an admirable job of providing resources within their constraints on short notice to expedite cargo. CBP is a valuable partner and routinely works to provide adequate staffing for the Port of Oakland and ensure the flow of commerce.”