A dispute over work rules shut down terminals at Port of Oakland, but the backlog of ships has been reduced.
Employers and shippers are complaining that longshoremen in Oakland are engaging in illegal work stoppages despite the tentative agreement last month between the International Longshore and Warehouse Union and Pacific Maritime Association on a new, five-year coast-wide contract.
In a statement, the PMA said ILWU Local 10 has “repeatedly engaged in illegal work stoppages at the Port of Oakland, bringing operations to a standstill at Oakland International Container Terminal, the largest terminal in the port,” which is operated by Stevedoring Services of America.
Mike Zampa, a spokesman for the Port of Oakland, said the five terminals in the port “continue to make progress on the backlog despite suspension of operations Wednesday at the terminal. Only four vessels were anchored or holding station yesterday: down from 20 in mid-February.”
The PMA said, “ILWU Local 10 has repeatedly refused to allow yard crane operators to work as directed. These workers are essential to the movement of cargo in and out of the port. The terminal in question follows standard industry practice of hiring two workers for every yard crane – the same as at every other terminal at the port. Yet, ILWU Local 10 is refusing to allow yard cranes to operate unless that number is increased to three. This is a demand that Local 10 made and dropped during negotiations that led to the tentative agreement”
“Similarly, Local 10 has also refused to allow longshore utility workers to lock and unlock connecting devices between chassis and containers,” PMA added. “The use of steady utility workers to perform this work is a longstanding practice at every terminal in the port. Once again, Local 10 made a demand in bargaining to change this practice but dropped it in the tentative agreement.”
The PMA said, “These repeated work stoppages by Local 10 – which run counter to the tentative agreement reached after more than nine months of negotiations – are the sort of counterproductive activity that has become commonplace in Oakland over the years. Local 10’s current actions are damaging to the PMA member companies, to the shippers whose containers are idled, and to the reputation and future of the Port of Oakland.”
Chris Lytle, executive director of the Port of Oakland, said in an interview with American Shipper on Tuesday he expected the port to be back to normal in two to three months.
Lytle thinks Oakland was less distressed than Southern California ports and that it should return to normal faster. He explained that operators of some vessels delayed in Southern California decided to discharge all cargo in Los Angeles or Long Beach and skip calls in Oakland in an attempt to get their ships back on schedule. This reduced the number of ships waiting for berths at the Port of Oakland’s terminals.
Peter Friedmann, executive director of the Agriculture Transportation Coalition said Wednesday, “It is clear that the west coast port disruption is not over…this week’s events up and down the coast, particularly in Oakland, suggest that this work is not yet done.”
He said there were problems at OICT on other days as well. Friedman cited messages on Tuesday that said due to heavy truck volume it was necessary to temporarily shut off new import picks to clear out the areas, and on Monday that said all import delivery lanes were suspended due to labor issues.
Friedmann said the director of a major importer that has 12 containers on board a ship stuck in the Port of Oakland told him that the importer is being charged $1,540 in demurrage for failing to return a container to the terminal within the contracted free time.
“That importer has had truckers in line daily and has at this point only recovered 5 containers,” said Friedman. “In other words, the terminal is charging the importer for cargo that it cannot pickup!
“Meanwhile, up in Portland, labor-management disputes resulted in recent, and permanent cessation of Hanjin service (which had carried 80% of the Port of Portland container traffic),” he added. “The company hauling Oregon ag exports up to Ports of Tacoma/Seattle, is overwhelmed. Trucks can not even get into the terminal to drop off cargo, so shipments are missing sailings.”
ICTSI, which operates the container terminal in Portland, said that on Monday the U.S. District Court in Oregon ordered the ILWU to pay a $59,628 fine for the attorney fees and expenses of the National Labor Relations
Board in obtaining a contempt order.
On Dec. 16, 2014, Judge Michael Simon ruled that the ILWU International in San Francisco and ILWU Local 8 in Portland willfully and intentionally violated the court’s previous injunction against work stoppages and slowdowns at Terminal 6 in Portland
ICTSI said Simon ruled ILWU leadership encouraged its members to engage in unlawful work stoppages and slowdowns, and directed and coordinated their actions such that Local 8 officers themselves directly participated in this conduct.
Jennifer Sargent, a spokesman for the ILWU, said, “It’s standard procedure when the Board prevails in court to pay market rate attorney fees for their time. The money reimbursed to the Board is based on market rates and is far above their actual expenses – so the Board and government actually profit from workers by pursuing litigation against their unions. In this case, though the Board was successful in part, it largely lost, because the Board’s pursuit of contempt charges after August of 2013 going forward was denied by the judge. The contempt finding narrowly applied only to work involving refrigerated containers, and only to a limited period of time that ended almost two years ago.”
Employers, shippers complain about ILWU actions in Oakland
