> But it'll remind other companies of what happens if they go too far (hence why they spend so much on union busting/prevention).
How did the ports "go too far"? They agreed to 50% raises over 6 years. That's still well above inflation.
Laid off dock workers still get paid via container royalties. In fact, about half of the ILA isn't even working, they're being paid to do nothing by mere virte of the fact that they used to be longshoremen. Even if the get another job.
Increased shipping costs are a regressive tax: when the price of toilet paper goes up, proportionally the poor pay more because billionaires crap as much as paupers. Longshoremen already make well above average wages. They jealously guard union membership, a past lawsuit revealed that 50% of new union members had family ties to existing members, despite 20,000 people applying to just 350 positions. There is absolutely nothing progressive about this strike: their demands are to make the US economy less competitive, and to increase costs for the many to further enrich a privileged few.
>How did the ports "go too far"? They agreed to 50% raises over 6 years. That's still well above inflation.
I think you can look up all the stipulations dock workers had to put up with, especially over the pandemic. But just to keep it to this question: we had inflation a lot crazier than 7% or so they initially offered.
And given historical ways they use "automation" I would want better contracts highlighting what they do with workers when automation is stationed in. The whole bust of "okay we don't need you get out." is already way over the line of what EU and Asia would do. Especially for pensioned workers.
>they're being paid to do nothing by mere virte of the fact that they used to be longshoremen. Even if the get another job.
Yeah, sounds like a pension by another name of "royalties". I'm sure the first thing to automate out is whatever they define "container royalties" as. Even if it is indeed less efficient.
There's probably issues to address, but my general theme is that companies (including the government) will always keep trying to take from workers. If that means higher taxes, then whatever. They'd make up any other reason for tax hikes anyway.
>>How did the ports "go too far"? They agreed to 50% raises over 6 years. That's still well above inflation.
>I think you can look up all the stipulations dock workers had to put up with, especially over the pandemic. But just to keep it to this question: we had inflation a lot crazier than 7% or so they initially offered.
Since the start of the pandemic (Jan 2020) till August 2024 (the latest date for which data is available), the cumulative inflation has been 21%. Inflation has also mostly returned back to normal. The last few prints were around 3% YOY. In light of all this, 50% over 6 years is ludicrous.
>Yeah, sounds like a pension by another name of "royalties". I'm sure the first thing to automate out is whatever they define "container royalties" as. Even if it is indeed less efficient.
The difference is that pensions are "earned" through years of service, and are agreed on ahead of time. Asking for payments for no work being done, under the threat of labor disruptions is closer to a shakedown.
>the cumulative inflation has been 21%. Inflation has also mostly returned back to normal. The last few prints were around 3% YOY. In light of all this, 50% over 6 years is ludicrous.
Only of you think 21% raises makes up for years of lost costs, and ignore what inflation did to the rest of the economy that did not in fact come down.
>The difference is that pensions are "earned" through years of service, and are agreed on ahead of time
>Asking for payments for no work being done.
Sure, like a union contract. Or a job contract with pension. Given the amount of employee contracts broken, employees need to play hardball. Why would I sympathize with people have historically broken contracts in spirits.
They've proven they need actual, immediate consequences, because even suing them is just a stall tactic. I have no sympathy.
The work is done and still utilized. Thars how royalties work. Peolel who hate pensions say the exact same thing, "why am I paying this worker who isn't working"?
>under the threat of labor disruptions is closer to a shakedown.
Shakedown makes it sound like the poor USMX is some small businessman struggling to stay afloat.
Meanwhile they are paid with our money. If they can't keep labor happy with my tax dollars then they reap what they sow. The workers getting the money they deserve is great.
How did the ports "go too far"? They agreed to 50% raises over 6 years. That's still well above inflation.
Laid off dock workers still get paid via container royalties. In fact, about half of the ILA isn't even working, they're being paid to do nothing by mere virte of the fact that they used to be longshoremen. Even if the get another job.
Increased shipping costs are a regressive tax: when the price of toilet paper goes up, proportionally the poor pay more because billionaires crap as much as paupers. Longshoremen already make well above average wages. They jealously guard union membership, a past lawsuit revealed that 50% of new union members had family ties to existing members, despite 20,000 people applying to just 350 positions. There is absolutely nothing progressive about this strike: their demands are to make the US economy less competitive, and to increase costs for the many to further enrich a privileged few.