Consistency in a world gone mad?

by Paul Kinsella - ATGWU (In a personal capacity) Sun Aug 11, 2002 22:39 paulkinsella53 at yahoo dot com 53 Lorcan Grove, Santry, Dublin 9, Eire 087 - 9748511

WAR ON THE DOCKS???

The Bush administration has intervened aggressively in labor talks at West Coast ports, with high-level officials signaling that they are prepared to take strong action to prevent an economically crippling strike or slowdown. One option, and perhaps the most likely, would be for the president to declare a national emergency and invoke the Taft-Hartley Act, which would force the delay of a strike for 80 days. The act was last used in 1978 during a coal miners' strike. Leaders of the International Longshore and Warehouse Union say the government's involvement has blunted their bargaining strength and actually prolonged negotiations, which are in their third month. They also view it as part of a pattern intended to weaken unions. Other options the Bushies have hinted include running the ports with U.S. Navy personnel, and moving to break up the union's coast-wide bargaining unit or backing legislation that would restrict the union's ability to call a strike. "There were some pretty harsh statements," said Bob McEllrath, a vice president of the ILWU. "I've negotiated these contracts for the West Coast since '93, and I've never seen this before." Yet another option considered by Bush would move the Longshore union to the jurisdiction of the national Railway Labor Act, which now governs union activity in rail transport and airlines. The act gives courts and the administration far more power to prevent strikes and impose contract settlements than does the National Labor Relations Act, which governs most private sector labor negotiations. "Why should the PMA negotiate seriously when the Bush administration says, 'Don't worry, we will take care of these guys at the ILWU.' That's the situation we are facing," said Steve Stallone, media spokesperson for the West Coast longshore workers union. Stallone was further quoted as saying, "The Bush administration is using the 9-11 scare as a way to try to take away union rights and come after the ILWU, because we are one of the stronger unions in the country." In fact, the talks have been complicated by the attempted intervention on the side of the shipping and terminal bosses first by Homeland Security Director Tom Ridge and then Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

A strike or an employer-led lockout seemingly means that the government would then intervene, and the entire labor movement would be put to a test, not unlike the test the labor movement failed when the government smashed the famous air controllers strike and broke the controllers union. If the AFL-CIO doesn't go to bat for them though, the union may attempt to go over the heads of the AFL-CIO and appeal to all workers, unionized and not, to do whatever it takes -- much as workers did in 1934 when the union won its right to strike – to successfully fight off the bosses and the governmental authorities.
Source: Portworkers Solidarity Committee 2002

by STOP NYC Inc. Tue Aug 13, 2002 16:20

If Bush uses the U.S. military to break a strike by longshoremen on their West-side, then all over the world longshore workers should show their solidarity by walking off the job and shutting ALL the ports down!