ILWU Caucus Rejects PMA’s Proposals
The ILWU Longshore Caucus firmly rejected PMA’s latest contract proposals, viewing the document as substandard. In the union’s view the questions of technology change make this round of bargaining similar to the historic Modernization and Mechanization Agreement of the 1960s. Contrary to PMA’s rhetoric in the media that they’ve offered the ILWU a good package, the union views PMA’s proposal as an attempt at gaining much and giving little. Despite PMA’s claims of a 17 percent increase in the overall package (this comes primarily from increases in the cost of benefits), the Longshore Caucus has sifted through the rhetoric and has exposed PMA’s proposals as concessionary. The main issues:
Maintenance of Benefits
The PMA claims to offer the Union full maintenance of benefits. The truth is that PMA is actually changing the structure of the benefits plan. The PMA is proposing a two-tiered system in which new registrants will be offered the HMO plan only. This is a change from the current plan in which new registrants have an option of HMO or the indemnity PPO and 80-20 medical plans, that is the option to chose their own doctors. The proposal also calls for adopting “additional methods that would increase enrollment in HMOs.” The PMA is trying to eliminate PPO service and over time push all the ILWU membership into HMOs. Under PMA’s plan, as people retire, all members will only have access to the HMO plan. This is not maintenance of benefits, but a ploy by the PMA to reduce the standards of the medical plan. The Union is firm in its resolution to achieve maintenance of benefits.
Technology
The PMA’s proposal on technology that impacts clerk work is vague and allows for the possibility of the employer to continue to outsource work to non-union workforces. In return, the PMA offered marine clerks who can’t obtain work a 40-hour guarantee, something already available under the current contract. The PMA’s proposal involves taking full advantage of technology which brings cost reduction and higher productivity and efficiency, but is not willing to share the gains with the Union.
On the contrary, the ILWU took the real initiative in this question by proposing a concrete technology plan that was sensible and fit the needs of the industry. The Union’s plan was both innovative and fair and would result in a 30 percent reduction in marine clerks work on the West Coast. The plan allowed for the “free flow” of information into West Coast terminals, a key request by the PMA prior to negotiations. In return the ILWU was asking for new jobs created by technology and planning jobs that have been outsourced to non-union workforces. The employers flatly rejected the Union’s offer stating it was not good enough and would actually increase the number of marine clerk and increase overall costs. This was a complete lie straight out of the textbook of corporate misinformation. Of the 5,600,000 man hours worked in the marine clerks category last year, a 30 percent reduction would be a loss of 631 jobs coastwise. A loss of 631 jobs, wages and benefits combined would result in a cost savings to the employer of at least $102 million. This figure does not include whatever savings would occur from higher productivity and efficiency. The planning jobs that the Union is asking for would probable amount to no more than 75 jobs coastwise. The biggest ports, Los Angeles and Long Beach, already have a majority of ILWU planners. PMA’s argument of increased cost and manning is a fallacy.
Context
This contract is being negotiated in a context in which PMA is being given huge concessions in order to move the industry forward. The magnitude of this is being down played by PMA in an attempt to get a lot for nothing. It is true, PMA has offered meager raises in wages and pensions, but they’ve also insisted on changes in work schedules and changes in the arbitration system. What the PMA stands to gain, far outweighs that they’re offering. The ILWU Longshore Caucus has exposed this imbalance and has voted to reject PMA’s proposals despite constant threats of intervention from the U. S. government.
cwa39521