Port Strike

[mtnbiker208]

After reading those threats, I would give them their money, pass a right to work law, train new people and fire everyone. No way I would allow a union to blackmail the USA. It's almost like an act of terrorism.

sounds good and all, but have you tried hiring lately? dang near impossible.

 

[307]

sounds good and all, but have you tried hiring lately? dang near impossible.

Robots don't strike.

 

[flathead#2]

I really doubt they're going to be successful with the no automation wish
and the wage increases I'm hearing are quite unrealistic as well.
JMO

 

[JeffRaines]

People always use the argument that unions prevent folks from being fired. I'm not saying this doesn't ever happen, I've just never seen it. I have seen multiple people get fired.

Bad leadership prevents people from being fired.

You end up with lazy “leaders” who don’t want to go through the process of documenting problem employees so they just let them go.

Unions have no issues firing people when the processes are followed.

To be fair though, in my industry I’ve seen people do some pretty messed up stuff in non union positions and still be kept on. At my last job(non union) one guy got a bunch of chances after getting caught multiple times using the company fuel card to fuel his personal vehicles. Another guy literally made his own schedule and showed up when he decided he wanted to. They did finally let the fuel thief go… the other guy still works there(still doing the same shit).

 

[william schmaltz]

The president has the emergency power under the Taft Hartley Act to force stall a strike and create a cooling down period while a contract is negotiated. That would protect the American people from shortages and massive price increases, but would cost a certain candidate a bunch of Union votes. Something the Union mob boss is well aware of so he knows that he’s safe in pushing this strike forward with perfect timing. Unions playing politics with the pocketbooks of Americans. They have the current administration up against the wall by the throat and damn well know it.

We order a lot of basic stuff online because of where we live and prices. Used to see my UPS guy almost daily. Really nice guy and enjoyed chatting with him. Since the UPS strike I thinks he’s been by a half dozen times. Still see him drive by every once in a while. But now all deliveries are third party contractors and Amazon shipped in their own delivery vans over the last year to deliver for them. Carful what you wish for. Everyone goes in on CEOs salaries and profits and what not and that’s all well and dandy. But companies and CEOs are not going to take a pay cut because of some union contract or minimum wage hike, they’ll increase prices or find a cheaper way (automation) to get the job done in order to keep their profits/salaries. Again, be careful what you wish for.

 

[JFK]

Automate and eliminate the middle class. Then what? People that say “learn something new and do a different job,” understand that automation means less jobs, not different jobs. What’s wrong with people making a good living? I’m union and would agree that sometimes they overstep, but union employees benefit by having a union prevailing wage in the region. Why no feigned outrage over companies that dick over their employees? If the company is prospering, then all good employees should prosper with it.

With very few exceptions regions that weaken previously strong unions don’t fair very well in the long run.

 

[JustinNC]

Automate and eliminate the middle class. Then what? People that say “learn something new and do a different job,” understand that automation means less jobs, not different jobs. What’s wrong with people making a good living? I’m union and would agree that sometimes they overstep, but union employees benefit by having a union prevailing wage in the region. Why no feigned outrage over companies that dick over their employees? If the company is prospering, then all good employees should prosper with it.

With very few exceptions regions that weaken previously strong unions don’t fair very well in the long run.

I've YET to meet a member of ANY union that's not already making a good living at whatever they do. Unions lost me when I watched them pay people $25/hr in 2014, to NOT work, and protest and disrupt a construction job that was comprised of non-union workers.

At some point you have to say "ive got it good enough" rather than "weve got them by the balls, more more more!".

Not speaking directly to you, but unions are notorious for this. Formed in good faith, doing good things, and then poof, making exorbitant demands and strong arming anyone willing to step in and do the work (scabs?).

 

[brando20]

The short answer is we have always cost 5% of the ship lines total cost. We are now 1.5%. The CEO of maersk received a 500 million dollar Christmas bonus last year lol. Yes we want a 50% increase but that’s over an 8 year period, not right off the top. To be transparent both sides have been unreasonable

500 million dollar bonus?! The disregard for common folk is just getting completely out of hand. You only get a bonus of that size and proportion if you've been compromised and have cut some throats here and there along the way. Makes you wonder.

 

[DAOutfitters208]

I've YET to meet a member of ANY union that's not already making a good living at whatever they do. Unions lost me when I watched them pay people $25/hr in 2014, to NOT work, and protest and disrupt a construction job that was comprised of non-union workers.

At some point you have to say "ive got it good enough" rather than "weve got them by the balls, more more more!".

Not speaking directly to you, but unions are notorious for this. Formed in good faith, doing good things, and then poof, making exorbitant demands and strong arming anyone willing to step in and do the work (scabs?).

Same can be said for the top executives at many companies. When will they be satisfied with what they got?

 

[Jimbee]

Bad leadership prevents people from being fired.

You end up with lazy “leaders” who don’t want to go through the process of documenting problem employees so they just let them go.

Unions have no issues firing people when the processes are followed.

To be fair though, in my industry I’ve seen people do some pretty messed up stuff in non union positions and still be kept on. At my last job(non union) one guy got a bunch of chances after getting caught multiple times using the company fuel card to fuel his personal vehicles. Another guy literally made his own schedule and showed up when he decided he wanted to. They did finally let the fuel thief go… the other guy still works there(still doing the same shit).

There are entitled, lazy, etc workers on both sides. People are going to focus on whatever validates their beliefs.

 

[Beendare]

The facts;
They unload ships
They stay understaffed for more OT pay
With OT they make upwards of $150,000 a year
The did turn down a 50% raise (over 5years)
They want a 77% raise over 5 years

Saying the CEO makes a lot of money is a ridiculous comparison- THEY UNLOAD SHIPS.

 

[Rotnguns]

Look up some of the full automated ports. Crane operators are gone, truck drivers are gone, clerks have been replaced. It takes very few people to run the entire port. It’s not something that we can work alongside. It’s a complete replacement. Most of us are not against technology, we are against losing 90% of our jobs. The union is not perfect but without it we would be unemployed. In the last 3 years we have been under the same contract, wages haven’t increased & the cost to ship a 40’ container has tripled. We aren’t the cause of inflation / shipping rates. When the demand rises so do their prices

Ok, but as an engineer, I cannot agree with refusing to implement technology to protect the status quo. Using this logic, we would not have computer-aided design, computerized medicine, electronic engine control systems, and a host of other features that have improved our quality of life over the years. I get what you are saying, but why do jobs have to be lost when automation is implemented? Existing workers can be retrained to operate and maintain control systems and semi-autonomous equipment, enabling the expansion and enhancement of port functionality. If less workers are needed in the future, meet the reduced need through attrition and perhaps buyouts and early retirement options. People don't have to lose their jobs, and we don't have to use outdated technology. I think both sides need to give a little here.

 

[maxx075]

As far as the automation goes and why they're pushing for it - you have to put yourself in the shoes of a CEO.
First off, they don't care about you, the peon, at all. Much like politicians, all they see and care about is the money, and how they can get more of it.

They see a robot/automated system as a worker that only costs $x that they only have to pay for once. This worker doesn't show up late, complain, require health insurance, or annual "raises". Basically, if the CEO can get rid of you for a cheaper alternative, they will.

 

[Yoder]

Automate and eliminate the middle class. Then what? People that say “learn something new and do a different job,” understand that automation means less jobs, not different jobs. What’s wrong with people making a good living? I’m union and would agree that sometimes they overstep, but union employees benefit by having a union prevailing wage in the region. Why no feigned outrage over companies that dick over their employees? If the company is prospering, then all good employees should prosper with it.

With very few exceptions regions that weaken previously strong unions don’t fair very well in the long run.

They said the same thing during the industrial revolution. You can't keep digging with a shovel when you have an excavator. I was always taught that if you don't like your job or your pay, find another job. Companies don't owe you anything, if they choose to pay you more, that's up to them. Otherwise, it's socialism. A raise should be a reward for a job well done, not an entitlement for staying another year.

It's hard to find people that are competent and want to work hard. I've never had a problem finding a job and I get paid well for what I do, and I've never been in a union. A big reason I don't like unions is I've been threatened by union electricians. We also had electrical panels destroyed since we were "non union scabs taking American jobs." When I was younger my dad was threatened at a job site putting on siding. They told him how many squares of aluminum siding the apartments would take. He told them he would measure it himself. They basically told him if he came up with a different number he was going to have a really bad accident. These guys would throw away anything they cut at all. It made the job take way more siding. So not only did they get paid more for installing a couple extra squares of siding, they also made about $.50/lb on the scrap aluminum.

 

[mike.adams.467]

Thanks for weighing in. I grew up as a typical conservative and anti-union guy. But recently my views have changed, at least in some instances. The recent railway strike was one - I had no idea of the difficulties in taking sick days, as an example.

Can you give more context and history? The WSJ reported today on the union refusing a 50% pay increase and wanting instead a 77% increase (both of which would be over a period of years) as a threshold concession to resume talks. The WSJ didn’t give any more details and focused the rest of the story on the possible consumer impact. How long has it been since there were wage increases and what other things are sought?

I'm not a CNN guy. The inefficiencies of American docks is well known, and this crippling strike is definitely based on greed - probably on both sides.

 

[mike.adams.467]

This is not even kinda true, I work on the docks and have been sitting in on the negations. Our docks are some of the best in the world from a production stand point. Turn off CNN. Very true we fighting against automation. lol I wish they offered a 300% increase in our retirement.

From Newsmax: "The USMX said in a statement on Monday it had offered to hike wages by nearly 50%... "the union is pushing for more, including a $5 per hour raise for EACH YEAR OF THE NEW SIX-YEAR CONTRACT". Seriously?

 

[Gstew1930]

Ok, but as an engineer, I cannot agree with refusing to implement technology to protect the status quo. Using this logic, we would not have computer-aided design, computerized medicine, electronic engine control systems, and a host of other features that have improved our quality of life over the years. I get what you are saying, but why do jobs have to be lost when automation is implemented? Existing workers can be retrained to operate and maintain control systems and semi-autonomous equipment, enabling the expansion and enhancement of port functionality. If less workers are needed in the future, meet the reduced need through attrition and perhaps buyouts and early retirement options. People don't have to lose their jobs, and we don't have to use outdated technology. I think both sides need to give a little here.

I agree with what you're saying. The problem is its not IF jobs will be lost, they will be lost. The hard part is finding the line. I don't agree with everything they are negotiating on so i cannot defend all of it. If all 36 ports switch to fully automated facility's that puts around 60k people out of work. That i don't agree with, in any industry. Do you think when they come out with self driving 18 wheelers the teamsters wont try & fight it? At some point sooner or later none of us need to work. AI can can design your house, forget the architect, trucks can drive themselves, we wont need truck drivers, AI can do marketing, don't need those people any more either. Hell AI can do engineering now too. Like i said im not going to defend everything we are asking for because i don't agree with it all, i do believe in keeping jobs.

 

[Gstew1930]

From Newsmax: "The USMX said in a statement on Monday it had offered to hike wages by nearly 50%... "the union is pushing for more, including a $5 per hour raise for EACH YEAR OF THE NEW SIX-YEAR CONTRACT". Seriously?

they would have agreed to the wage increase, thats not the point of the strike, its automation.

 

[MallardSX2]

Do you think when they come out with self driving 18 wheelers the teamsters wont try & fight it?

I hope the self-driving 18 wheelers don't drive in the left-hand land and block traffic for 39 miles or swerve into my freaking lane at me while they are likely looking at midget porn on their cell phones while I am just trying to cover ground heading west to go elk hunting.

Lord have mercy.

 

[idahodave]

i don't agree with it all, i do believe in keeping jobs.

To be clear...you mean you believe in keeping your job.

If others downstream lost their job because of interruptions as a result of the strike...that would seem to matter a bit less? If the engineers responsible for developing automation lose their jobs...also okay?
I'm not faulting you for fighting for your job brother, but let's acknowledge the associated "opportunity cost" as it were.

The idea that you are OWED a 50% pay increase over the next 5-8 years sounds laughable to most of the rest of the non-unionized country as that's not based in reality...that's California-type economics in that it's not sustainable.

Just one guy's opinion.

Dave