Port strikes end with deal on wages
npr.org
npr.org
Another one would be long term job security for current individuals, but unrestricted headcount.
While I think progress is important, I dont think we should repeat what we saw with NAFTA or heavy industry. It simply isnt realistic to expect every 50 year old dock worker to be able and willing to retrain and retool as a software engineer (not that that is a particularly good option right now).
I think a reasonable compromise between the unions and ports could be found where they essentially freeze hiring and allow headcount to dwindle as folks age out. perhaps some internal retraining would be possible as well so that people aren't just sitting on their hands.
Absolutely it could. The real obstacle is a pervasive Calvinist workism that rejects paying people to stay home (essentially severance pay) even when it would be better for everyone. The ports could easily make this offer, and the offer would easily be accepted by the union at some threshold of payout. The ports just don't make the offer.
And given the US's pathetic string we call a safety net, the businesses need to foot that bill if they really care about efficiency and long term benefits. But it's never truly about "advancement" for these people. It's control.
Only because they think their job will still be around. You can only prop up an industry with inefficient fake jobs for so long, and dock workers are getting near the end of that cycle.
>The only way to buy these people out is to set them up for life
Or just let them fail when their job is eliminated. Having some plan to step down the number of employees gradually through buy-outs, retirement, and reskilling, is the better option.
That's part of the issue. west coast shoremen do indeed make 6 figures. There's less to lose in the East coast unless you truly are a workoholic.
>The only way to buy these people out is to set them up for life
Pension plan would work fine too. But we know companies would rather die than bring that back. Loyalty is dead after all.
> Lots of overtime pay as well
If you believe the unions and they're not just no-show jobs
Your link proves both my points:
>That *top-tier hourly wage of $39 amounts* to just over $81,000 annually, but dockworkers can *make significantly more by taking on extra shifts*
And the report you link to seems to confirm that:
>During FY 2019-2020, deep-sea longshore workers (including checkers and special craft) were paid $621,858,750.79, including regular overtime wages, vacation and holiday benefits.
If your argument is really that ports are paying overtime for work that isn't needed, that sounds like a problem for the government to fix. If they are instead being paid to basically be "on call" because they need docksmen there at any time, or if docking gets delayed, then that's the cost of doing business. Pretty sure risking a no show to an on-site job is less likely than just needing to be there if/when shipments drol
I will grant you that the report goes very anti-union tho (and racist, for some reason) :
>Today, every terminal within the Port still has special compensation packages given to certain ILA longshore workers, the majority of whom are white males connected to organized crime figures or union leadership. Based on the industry’s reported figures, the Commission has again identified over 590 individuals who collectively received over $147.6 million dollars last year in outsized salaries, or for hours they never worked.
It's food for thought. But the fact that they are conflating "union leadership" with "organized crime" isn't doing them a good favor in impartiality.
Sure, but that isn't the question they were asking. They weren't appealing to the workers sense of efficiency. They simply asked if they can be paid off.
I hope they can compromise a proper retraining/pension plan. I'm normally fine with automation, but we've seen for a few decades now that companies just use it as an excuse to reduce labor costs while leaving people on the streets to fend for themselves. And the savings never pass to the consumer. Who's winning here?
If they won't budge on that, then clearly the intentions here are not efficiency. Pay your labor.