With less than two months to resolve a simmering conflict, negotiations between the United States Maritime Alliance (USMX) and the International Longshoremen’s Association (ILA) remain locked over one fundamental issue: automation. The standoff threatens operations across the East and Gulf Coast ports from New England down to Texas, as both parties grapple with the future of technology on America’s docks. The USMX, representing port owners, states that the union’s stance on automation has left them unable to finalize a deal, setting a January 15 deadline to avoid a potential strike.
According to the USMX, semi-automated cranes, which already feature in several U.S. ports, are essential to meet future supply chain needs. These cranes, equipped with real-time data and advanced positioning technology, allow workers to control operations remotely, eliminating the need to be on the crane itself. This technology, USMX argues, bolsters efficiency, increases safety, and secures the future of U.S. ports as global supply demands surge. But the ILA has consistently opposed automation, with union leaders asserting that automation, even in partial forms, poses a threat to the jobs they are determined to protect.
Automation has long been a sticking point for ILA President Harold Daggett, who has advocated for contract language explicitly barring automation on any level. Reflecting on past contract wins, Daggett has emphasized the ILA’s insistence on “no automation means no automation.” In a statement following recent wage discussions, he reiterated, “The ILA wants absolute airtight language that there will be no automation or semi-automation.”
This isn’t just rhetoric. Earlier this year, Dennis Daggett, the ILA’s executive vice president, compared automation to a “cancer” in a meeting with union members, declaring the union’s unyielding commitment to fight against technology that replaces human labor. Despite assurances from the USMX that they aim only to increase efficiency, union officials argue that any introduction of automation could erode job security and long-standing labor rights.
The October strike highlighted just how much leverage the union holds, with significant delays hitting cargo flow nationwide during a three-day walkout that left ripple effects for weeks. As USMX seeks a path to modernization, many in the industry worry that a further breakdown in talks will result in another walkout, impacting not just ports but American businesses and workers tied to a smoothly functioning supply chain.
Industry experts and stakeholders have voiced frustration over the lack of progress. Stephen Lamar, CEO of the American Apparel and Footwear Association, expressed disappointment with the ILA’s recent exit from negotiations, emphasizing the toll delays and labor unrest have had on American jobs and transportation networks. He underscored the importance of reaching a long-term, sustainable solution for both sides, noting the challenges that ongoing disruptions bring to industries reliant on timely shipping and port access.
Academic studies on automation’s impact on labor have presented mixed results, further complicating the issue. One study, led by Dr. Michael Nacht of UC Berkeley and commissioned by the Pacific Maritime Association, suggests that automation has actually led to increased jobs at semi-automated terminals in Long Beach and Los Angeles. However, an ILWU-backed study reached the opposite conclusion, reporting that automation reduced job hours and wages.
For now, negotiations remain at a standstill with no set date for further talks. As the January 15 deadline looms, the industry waits to see if compromise can be reached before a potential strike that could disrupt the backbone of U.S. trade.
Source:CNBC
