On October 6, the United States "Wall Street Journal" website published a comment article that the United States port is inefficient, the World Bank data show that in terms of ship time in port, China's Yangshan port ranked first, while the best performance of the United States port only ranked 53rd. The article also pointed out that the American dockworkers who went on strike recently demanded better pay while also demanding a rejection of automation.

    The North American union, the International Longshoremen's Association (ILA), has reached a tentative agreement with management to return to work after its demand for a 62% pay rise over six years was met, but the dispute is not over. In a second "fight," the union demanded a ban on any automation at U.S. ports to "permanently protect jobs."

    Harold Daggett, president of the International Longshoremen's Association, wrote in a September 7 letter to union members that the bottom line of the union's demands is that it "does not support any type of automation, including semi-automation" measures.

    The International Longdockers' Association does not want to use any of the technological advances that would make ship loading and unloading faster, safer and more efficient, such as smarter cranes, gates and container handling trucks that require fewer workers to operate. They want higher wages without higher productivity, which is not sustainable in a competitive global economic landscape.

    The Wall Street Journal cites a World Bank ranking of global port performance to illustrate the real-world results of such requirements. The 2023 Container Port Performance Index ranking, based on the length of time ships spend in port, shows that no U.S. port makes it into the top 50, with the highest-ranked U.S. port, Charleston, South Carolina, ranking only 53rd. China's Yangshan port ranks first in the world, and the country is investing in ports in Latin America and elsewhere.

    The Wall Street Journal notes that this isn't the first time dockworkers have had trouble with technological advances. When the "container revolution" occurred in the 1960s, parts cargoes were centralized into large standardized containers, simplifying loading and unloading, and the number of dockworkers decreased with the popularity of containers. Today, terminals in other countries are automating faster than in the United States, making them cheaper and more efficient.

    "By now, Mr. Daggett, the 78-year-old president of the International Longshoremen's Association, should have understood that fighting production is a losing battle." Look at what happened to those British miners who thought they could fight the closure of unprofitable mines and save their jobs. A hundred years ago, British textile workers also opposed the introduction of mechanized looms."

    The harsh truth, the authors write, is that technological advances that increase companies' productivity often also mean those companies will need fewer workers.

    "Longshoremen would be better off in the long run if the union could negotiate a better buyout package for older workers who have long enjoyed job security, rather than trying to delay the inevitable." A healthy, growing economy creates new and better jobs, which is better for displaced workers."

    Resisting productivity tools being adopted by the rest of the world would hurt the U.S. economy and as many as millions of American workers outside of ports. Mr Daggett and his partner, President Joe Biden, should act more responsibly with the union's 50, 000 members.

    Earlier, due to the breakdown of contract renewal negotiations, the International Longshoremen's Federation, which represents all major port workers on the eastern coast of the United States, officially held its first strike in nearly 50 years from the early morning of October 1, Eastern time. According to Reuters, this means that about half of the country's ocean traffic has come to a standstill.

    The conflict of interest comes at a delicate time for both the economy and politics, with the US election about five weeks away, and the economic fallout from the strike could put Mr Biden, who describes himself as "the most pro-labour in history", and the Democratic Party in a difficult position.

    On the evening of October 3 local time, the International Longshoremen's Union of the United States and the United States Maritime Union (USMX) issued a joint statement announcing that major port workers on the East Coast and Gulf Coast of the United States have reached a preliminary agreement with port management on wages and will "immediately stop" the "largest strike action in nearly 50 years" that began in the early morning of October 1. Restore all work covered by the main contract.

    The two sides agreed to extend the main contract, which expired Sept. 30, until Jan. 15, meaning any possible strikes and potential supply shortages of goods would be delayed until after the presidential election in November. The result also defused a "political time bomb" for Democrats, especially candidate and Vice President Harris.

    "By the grace of God and the goodwill of our neighbors, this agreement will endure," U.S. President Joe Biden said when asked about the tentative deal late Wednesday, AP reported. In a later statement, Biden praised the "patriotic" move by both sides to secure critical supplies for recovery and rebuilding after Hurricane Hailene.

    People familiar with the matter said that the White House sent a number of senior administration officials to intervene to push the two sides to reach an agreement as soon as possible. After several days of negotiations, White House Chief of staff Zients held an online meeting with senior executives of multinational shipping companies early on the morning of the 4th local time to stress the necessity of opening the port for post-disaster reconstruction work, and the director of the White House National Economic Council Brainard and acting Labor Secretary SUSIE urged the management to raise the offer, saying that it would convince the union.

    According to people familiar with the matter, the tentative agreement between port workers and management provides for a salary increase of about 62 per cent for port workers over the next six years. This is still less than the 77% the ILA had previously requested, but higher than USMX's previous offer of a 50% wage increase. However, Reuters pointed out on the 3rd that a key issue that led to the strike, namely the application of port automation technology, has still not been resolved, which may divide the two sides in future negotiations. In addition, the New York Times said, unions have also been demanding higher retirement benefits for workers.

声明：转载此文是出于传递更多信息之目的。若有来源标注错误或侵犯了您的合法权益，请作者持权属证明与本网联系，我们将及时更正、删除，谢谢。