[[link removed]]

AFL-CIO WARNS HOUSE GOP  
[[link removed]]


 

Olivia Rosane
September 27, 2024
Common Dreams
[[link removed]]


*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

_ Do Not to Interfere With Longshoremen's Labor Battle _

In an aerial view, shipping containers are seen at the Port of
Houston Authority on September 20, 2024 in Harris County, Texas.,
Brandon Bell/Getty Images

 

The president of the AFL-CIO sent a letter to House Republicans on
Thursday asking them not to intervene in contract negotiations between
the International Longshoremen's Association and the U.S. Maritime
Alliance, which could lead to the first East Coast port strike since
1977 if a deal is not struck by October 1.

The letter came in response to another letter sent
[[link removed]]
by Republican lawmakers to U.S. President Joe Biden on September 19,
urging him to "find a reasonable resolution to these contract
disputes" and to "utilize every authority at its disposal to ensure
the continuing flow of goods" if a strike does occur.

"Averting a strike is the responsibility of the employers who refuse
to offer ILA members a contract that reflects the dignity and value of
their labor," AFL-CIO president Elizabeth H. Shuler wrote
[[link removed]]
in response to the GOP representatives. "The fight for a fair contract
for longshoremen is the entire labor movement's fight."

"The public strongly supports these front-line workers and their just
demand for economic security."

A potential strike would see between 25,000 and 50,000 workers walk
off the job on Tuesday at 36 locations along 14 East and Gulf Coast
port authorities, including 10 of the busiest in North America.

The union wants substantial raises to cover the cost of inflation.
While West Coast port workers make
[[link removed]] a
base wage of $54.85, their East and Gulf Coast counterparts make only
$39.

The ILA is also demanding
[[link removed]]
better healthcare, and a promise not to install automated or
semi-automated terminals at the ports. However, negotiations between
the union and the U.S. Maritime Alliance (USMX) broke down in June
when the ILA said that USMX had begun using an automated gate to allow
trucks into ports, in violation of the current contract.

The union has since contacted USMX to discuss wage increases, but the
company has not upped its offer.

"My ILA members are not going to accept these insulting offers that
are a joke considering the work my ILA longshore workers perform, and
the billion-dollar profits the companies make off the backs of their
labor," ILA president and lead negotiator Harold J. Daggett said in a
statement
[[link removed]]
on Monday.

"The blame for a coast wide strike in a week that will shut down all
ports on the Atlantic and Gulf Coasts falls squarely on the shoulders
of USMX," Daggett continued.

In their letter, the Republican representatives warned about how the
strike "would result in delays and dire impacts to our supply chains,
our economy, and the American consumer." They evoked the "supply-chain
crisis" during the Covid-19 pandemic that was a major driver of
inflation, saying that a one-week strike would cause a one-and-a-half
month backlog.

However, Shuler said that the GOP letter made a strike—and its
economic consequences—more likely, not less. That's because the
leaning on Biden to use his authority to "ensure the continuing flow
of goods," suggested Shuler, could reasonably be interpreted as a
request for him to file a judicial injunction under the Taft-Hartely
Act to stop a strike from taking place.

"History tells us that when companies can count on an injunction
against a strike, they do not negotiate in good faith to reach an
agreement. By even suggesting a possible injunction, your letter makes
a deal less likely and a strike all the more likely," Shuler said.

This is especially the case because the Biden administration told
[[link removed]]_Reuters
_earlier this month that it had "never invoked Taft-Hartley to break a
strike and are not considering doing so now."

"Yet," Shuler told the representatives, "your letter tries to suggest
otherwise, giving the companies reason to dig in their heels. Instead
of calling for government intervention, a far more productive tact
would be to press the companies to meet the workers' very reasonable
demands."

Shuler defended the workers' rights to wages that keep pace with
living costs as well as job security in a changing technological
landscape.

"Like workers in many other industries—from hospitality to
healthcare to film and television—they need fair contract provisions
that protect their jobs from being eliminated by automation," Shuler
said.

She also noted that the port workers had made significant sacrifices
to keep the ports moving during the early years of Covid-19.

"Throughout the pandemic, longshore workers never took a day off,
risking their health and lives to make sure shelves were stocked and
the supply chain remained strong," Shuler wrote. "The public strongly
supports these front-line workers and their just demand for economic
security."

She continued: "It adds insult to injury to encourage USMX to provoke
a strike rather than agree to a fair contract for the workers who kept
food on the table and our economy running through the darkest days of
the Covid-19 crisis."

The Transportation Trades Department (TTD) of the AFL-CIO also spoke
out against government intervention in the negotiations.

"Relying on Taft-Hartley is not a winning strategy and should not be
USMX's expected path to resolution," TTD president and scretary Greg
Regan and Shari Semelsberger said in a statement. "The Biden-Harris
administration has already stated, in their own words, 'We've never
invoked Taft-Hartley to break a strike and are not considering doing
so now.'"

Regan and Semelsberg added that USMX was to blame for the risk of a
strike.

"Let us be clear: The employers, not the workers, have shirked their
responsibility and punted labor negotiations to the 11th hour, when
the damage to the public and the national supply chain would be most
detrimental," they said. "While USMX seeks to cast blame on the
frontline workers who move our supply chain, they are at fault."

"Remember this as they seek shelter from the disaster that they
created," Regan and Semelsberg concluded.

_This piece has been updated with a statement from the Transportation
Trades Department of the AFL-CIO._

Common Dreams is powered by optimists who believe in the power of
informed and engaged citizens to ignite and enact change to make the
world a better place.

* Strikes
[[link removed]]
* longshoremen
[[link removed]]

*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

 

 

 

INTERPRET THE WORLD AND CHANGE IT

 

 

Submit via web
[[link removed]]

Submit via email
Frequently asked questions
[[link removed]]
Manage subscription
[[link removed]]
Visit xxxxxx.org
[[link removed]]

Twitter [[link removed]]

Facebook [[link removed]]

 




[link removed]

To unsubscribe, click the following link:
[link removed]