Congestion at 29 West Coast Ports

[angelburst29]

About three months ago, I had noticed a short article concerning backups and delays in unloading of in-coming cargo at Long Beach Port in California. Inspections of cargo was mentioned as part of the problem. Then there seemed to be a news blackout during the Holidays.

I have noticed many of the grocery stores in my area including Wegman's, Walmart, Target, Price Chopper and some smaller stores have several empty spaces on food shelves. While on other's, a few idems are placed forward to fill the gap and if you take a product, there's an empty void behind it. Detergents and chemical products don't seem to be affected as much as paper products like T-paper, hand towels, diapers and bar soap. Fresh produce, meat and poultry prices have skyrocketed. I have found only one meat store in my area that doesn't add pink-slime to their hamburg.

All of this has been going on since late last Summer and has been more noticeable in the last few weeks, probably weather related due to several heavy snow falls and transportation delays. The article below mentions a possible shutdown of 29 ports - if the workers go on strike. Even if the strike only lasted a few days, if they strike, it will affect supply and demand through out the United States for weeks.


“Catastrophic Shutdown Of America’s Supply Chain Looms” As West Coast Port Worker Talks Break Down
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-02-05/catastrophic-shutdown-americas-supply-chain-looms-west-coast-port-worker-talks-break

For those who have been following the recent ISM reports, one of the recurring concerns of respondents in both the manufacturing and service sector has been the congestion at West Coast Ports – which handled 43.5% of containerized cargo in the U.S and where transiting cargo accounted for 12.5% of US GDP - as a result of reduced work output by the local unions who have been more focused in recent weeks on ongoing wage hike negotiations.

And according to the latest update from the 29 west coast ports that serve as the entry point of the bulk of Asia/Pac trade into and out of the US, things are about to get far worse for America’s manufacturing base, because as RILA reported earlier, talks between the Pacific Maritime Association (PMA) representing port management, and the International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILWU) officially broke down on Wednesday, and without an agreement, experts have suggested that nearly 30 west coast ports could be shut down within a week.

As RILA reports, “a work slowdown during contract negotiations over the past seven months has already created logistic nightmares for American exporters, manufacturers and retailers dependent on an efficient supply chain. A complete shutdown would be catastrophic, with hundreds of thousands of jobs at risk if America’s supply chain grinds to a halt.”

One can see why the US retail association is concerned. So will there be a strike? Here is Bloomberg’s take:

Union-led work slowdowns could halt the 29 U.S. West Coast ports in five to 10 days, the head of the shippers’ association said, urging the union to accept a new offer that includes 3 percent raises. James McKenna, the president of the Pacific Maritime Association, said backups and delays at many of the ports are harming farmers, manufacturers and consumers as the flow of goods approaches a “coast-wide meltdown.” He called on the International Longshore and Warehouse Union to accept management’s second formal contract proposal since negotiations began last May.

“We’re not considering a lockout,” McKenna said on a conference call with reporters, his first public comments since the talks began. “What I’m really saying is that this system will bring it to a stop. Once that happens, we really don’t have a choice.”

 

[SeekinTruth]

All that shows how fragile the supply chain is in the US. Things really aren't looking good. Any little thing can cause a major chain reaction, never mind several severe "black swan" type events....

 

[angelburst29]

All that shows how fragile the supply chain is in the US. Things really aren't looking good. Any little thing can cause a major chain reaction, never mind several severe "black swan" type events....

My thoughts in reading this - is that we have become a nation of consumers. Numerous jobs have been out-sourced to other countries and unemployment is extremely high, plus the majority of jobs even available are part time and low paying. By current stats, there's around 46 Million on Welfare. To a degree, it has brought retail consumerism down and many established stores like Sear's, Penny's, Radio Shack, etc. are closing shop, leaving Mall's and business outlets like ghost towns. Even Home Depot and Lowe's have cut employment and many shelves in their stores are sparse with re-order tags dotting the aisles, What effects everyone is the food grocery stores. A major shut down of 29 Ports, even for a short time would be catastrophic, especially since many States are experiencing Winter conditions.

As an example, this recent article, "One in five U.S. children now rely on food stamps: Census data" - The number of children in the United States relying on food stamps for a meal spiked to 16 million last year, according federal data, signaling a lopsided economic recovery in which lower income families are still lagging behind.

Republicans in Congress have sought to cut back on the Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program or food stamp program as part of a larger plan to balance the budget.

Early last year lawmakers proposed $40 billion in cuts from the program over 10 years. The final farm bill signed into law trimmed $8.6 billion from the program, eliminating benefits for about 850,000 people, according to estimates by anti-hunger advocates.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/01/28/us-usa-economy-families-idUSKBN0L12E120150128

Food Stamp Beneficiaries Exceed 46,000,000 for 38 Straight Months
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/ali-meyer/food-stamp-beneficiaries-exceed-46000000-38-straight-months


It might be prudent to take inventory of food supplies and other household necessities and try to have extra on hand, in case of an unexpected emergency. Food stamps are only useful - when there's product on the shelves. What will happen when the shelves are bare?

 

[anothermagyar]

[quote author=angelburst29]It might be prudent to take inventory of food supplies and other household necessities and try to have extra on hand, in case of an unexpected emergency. Food stamps are only useful - when there's product on the shelves. What will happen when the shelves are bare?
[/quote]

Do you have any at home?
We have in here at home number of cans of meat we made and also other cans of food which I purchased before, I stored it in the big closet.
I have 3-4 big boxes.
We living in the East coast.
I don't have any extra TP though.
Maybe time to store more.
I have also a lot of first aid supplies and a surgical kit.

Thank you to share.

 

[A Jay]

I can remember about a year or so ago when US Customs was holding a couple of cargo containers filled with coconut water that was meant to supply all the stores of the grocery chain I worked for at the time. Customs held the containers for a few weeks, but it was months before my store was restocked with a high-selling item.

Moral of that story and the one being shared here, it's always a good idea to have a rotating stock of items we use regularly. Thanks for the heads up angelburst!

 

[angelburst29]

An update on those West Coast Ports:

West Coast ports to reopen after weekend shutdown
http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2015/02/08/west-coast-ports-closure/23086097/

Monday Feb. 9, 2015 - LOS ANGELES — West Coast ports were expected to reopen to shipping Monday after a weekend shutdown that heightened labor tensions and hinted at the ongoing dispute’s potential to sap billions of dollars from the U.S. economy.

At the normally busy Port of Los Angeles, cranes sat idly perched over ships stacked high with containers during the weekend while other loaded vessels bobbed at anchor offshore. The terminal operators’ decision to shut down ship movements at 29 West Coast ports affected not only goods such as cars, clothing, building materials and electronics from Asia, but also American agricultural exports.

Even before the weekend, the Pacific Maritime Association, representing port terminal operators, said that a 14-week dockworker slowdown had choked cargo and ship movements. Though ship movements were at a standstill, the association said Sunday that yards in the five busiest ports — Seattle, Tacoma, Oakland, Los Angeles and Long Beach — were busy moving cargo off the docks.

 

[angelburst29]

Still major problems at the Seaports.

Ports in Seattle, Tacoma, Oakland, Los Angeles and Long Beach have been busy moving cargo off the docks but no ships with containers have been unloaded in the 20-some Ports and there's a huge backlog.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/west-coast-seaports-shut-amid-contract-dispute-28911079

Thurs. Feb. 12, 2015 -Companies that operate marine terminals said they weren't calling workers to unload ships Thursday that carry car parts, furniture, clothing, electronics — just about anything made in Asia and destined for U.S. consumers. Containers of U.S. exports won't get loaded either.

The partial lockout is the result of an increasingly damaging labor dispute between dockworkers' and their employers.

The two sides have been negotiating a new contract, and paralysis at the bargaining table is all but paralyzing 29 ports that handle about one-quarter of U.S. international trade — around $1 trillion worth of cargo annually.

The 15 ships scheduled to arrive Thursday at the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, by far the nation's largest complex, will join a trail of about 20 others anchored off the coast, awaiting berths at the docks to clear. There are clusters of ships outside the ports of Oakland, and Seattle and Tacoma in Washington.

The Southern California slots weren't opening Thursday. The ships occupying them were being idled because companies that operate marine terminals did not call dockworkers to operate the towering cranes which hoist containers of cargo on and off ships.

The berths won't clear Saturday, Sunday or Monday either. One each of the four days, dockworkers would get bonus pay — they are presidents' day holidays or weekends — and employers refuse to pay extra to longshoremen who have slowed their work rate as a pressure tactic, said Steve Getzug, a spokesman for the Pacific Maritime Association, which is bargaining on behalf of terminal operators and shipping companies.

Employers could still hire smaller crews that would focus on moving containers already clogging dockside yards onto trucks or trains in an effort to free space amid historically bad levels of congestion. Full crews would still service military and cruise ships, and any cargo ships bound for Hawaii.

But both are small operations compared to working container ships that are as long as some skyscrapers are tall.

Cargo has been struggling for months to cross the troubled West Coast waterfront. Containers that used to take two or three days to hit the highway have been taking a week or more, causing disruptions.

The maritime association blames the crisis on longshoremen they say have staged work slowdowns since November; dockworkers deny slowing down and say cargo is moving slowly for reasons they do not control, including a shortage of truck beds to take containers to retailers' distribution warehouses. In recent days, the International Longshore and Warehouse Union said companies are exaggerating the extent of congestion so they can cut dockworker shifts and pressure negotiators into a contract agreement.

The last contract bargaining session was Friday, nearly a week ago. Negotiations were to resume Wednesday in San Francisco, but were canceled despite heavy — and increasing — pressure from elected officials and businesses to reach a deal. The two sides rescheduled for Thursday.

Talks have stalled over how to arbitrate future workplace disputes. Some of the biggest issues, including health care, have been resolved with tentative agreements.

In response to employers' decision to limit work crews, announced Wednesday, the union noted that longshoremen also were not hired to load or unload vessels last weekend.

"The union is standing by ready to negotiate, as we have been for the past several days," union President Robert McEllrath said in a written statement. He suggested the maritime association is "trying to sabotage negotiations."

 

[angelburst29]

Aerial photography of the labor dispute at the Port of LA and Long Beach
http://www.mpkelley.com/blog/2015/2/10/aerial-photography-of-the-labor-dispute-at-the-port-of-la-and-long-beach

Cargo ships have been backed up for weeks on end at the ports of LA and Long Beach amid a labor dispute. 14 aerial photo's.

 

[Josi]

I have a really good friend who is a longshoreman in LA, she recently texted me saying, "The employer shut night sides down, last weekend started weekend shut down. Now Holiday shutdown. There is lots of room for containers. Media reports we are slowing down? We are up 70% without nights because we are all working so hard!"

Also, she sent some pictures and said, "These are some pics I took the other day of a yard they claim is full with no room. How can they say that? I've never see it so empty!!"

She is coming for a visit soon and going to fill me in.

http://www.sott.net/article/292471-Longshore-workers-have-answer-for-clearing-ship-congestion-Let-us-do-our-jobs


"While dockworkers have continued to work in good faith without a contract since July 1, 2014, PMA has launched a very public attack campaign leaving many people (and many in the media) under the false impression that congestion problems at the ports are a direct result of job actions taken by ILWU. In reality, the problems at the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach are a result of mismanagement by PMA and its member companies that began before the 2008 labor contract expired.

Within the past six years, port congestion has steadily increased as cargo ships have more than doubled in size and capacity. According to World News (WN.com), the size of cargo vessels crossing the Pacific Ocean have increased in size from two football fields to the equivalent of four football fields.

These megaships require up to eight "gangs" or crews, to handle cargo. However, since July 2014 (when the labor agreement with ILWU expired), PMA, in a mind-boggling move, reduced the number of gangs assigned to large cargo vessels to three, constituting a 75 percent reduction of workers. To make matters even worse, on New Year's Eve 2014, PMA announced an additional reduction in the workforce, assigning only one gang per ship during the night shift. That translates to reducing the number of crews assigned to unloading cargo by a staggering 87 percent. More recently, on Jan.13, 2015, night crews serving vessels were dropped by PMA altogether.

As a direct result of PMA's actions, more than 7,000 full-time longshore workers face steeply reduced hours of work. In addition, about 8,000 part-time or "casual" longshore workers will have little to no work available to them. Such drastic cuts in the workforce not only impact the families of the workers whose hours have been cut, but add to congestion at the port. This congestion financially impacts thousands of local and national businesses that rely on the ports to unload their merchandise in a timely manner.

Also, take a look at this:Aerial photos of ports show what the Pacific Maritime Association doesn't want the public to see

http://www.sott.net/article/292469-Aerial-photos-of-ports-show-what-the-Pacific-Maritime-Association-doesnt-want-the-public-to-see

 

[angelburst29]

I'm not sure what the intended purpose of this South Korean shipping companies move is - from docking in Portland, Ore. verses Seattle, Washington, when there's cargo ships anchored off the Seattle Port waiting to be unloaded?

Major shipping company pulls out of Portland
http://koin.com/2015/02/10/major-shipping-company-pulls-out-of-portland/

Friday Feb. 13, 2015 - PORTLAND, Ore. (KOIN 6) – An official with a South Korean shipping company that is the Port of Portland’s largest container carrier confirmed Hanjin Shipping will be terminating its service with the city.

In an email statement, Hanjin’s Mike Radak said the reason is simple: the company “can’t afford the expense of operating” in Portland.

Port spokesman Josh Thomas said Tuesday that Hanjin notified the port and customers it will withdraw services on March 9. Hanjin handles nearly 80 percent of the container volume at the port’s Terminal 6.

Without Hanjin, an estimated 657 people could lose their jobs — and about $12 million in state and local taxes could be lost.

Once Hanjin is gone, goods from Asia will have to travel in and out of the Portland area via Seattle, which would add to cost and shipping time. Port officials said Hanjin will continue to use rail and truck transportation.

“There’s going to be a shortage of products available throughout the industry, not just our industry, but most retailers,” business owner Mike Roelle told KOIN 6 News.

For customers, the change in shipping procedures could mean delays — sometimes up to a month — and higher prices on anything that ships from Asia.

“It’s going to be nationwide, it’s going to affect the west coast, the east coast and everything in between,” Bill Wyatt with the Port of Portland said.

Officials with the Port of Portland said they will work with terminal operators to recruit a new carrier.

Hanjin has had a presence in Portland since 1993, but the company has been unhappy about the pace of work among longshore workers and announced its intention to withdraw two years ago. Last year it decided to stay but said it would review productivity and costs.

 

[Josi]

_http://www.joc.com/port-news/longshoreman-labor/international-longshore-and-warehouse-union/west-coast-blame-game_20150213.html

The West Coast blame game

Michael Pellegrini | Feb 13, 2015 12:50PM EST


So the International Longshore and Warehouse Union is solely responsible for the humongous mess our West Coast ports are in? It must be so because I read it on JOC.com. My first concern is that perhaps this blame is misplaced. To get at the truth, let's look at the background.

First off, a normal workweek for longshoremen consists of 147 hours spread over three shifts in seven days — an eight-hour day shift, an eight-hour night shift, and a five-hour graveyard or "hoot owl" shift. If you take away the two night shifts each day, then you've lost 91 hours in a week, or about 62 percent of the available worktime. If you take away another two days from that, you drop the available work time to just 27 percent of normal.

Now as reported by JOC.com, the Pacific Maritime Association’s supposed goals for not hiring night and, now, weekend shifts, they say, is to reduce terminal congestion, and to reduce labor costs — to quit paying premium pay for what they consider to be workers with "diminished productivity."

So what is the PMA really trying to accomplish by reducing available work? And is it likely that by reducing available worktime to 27 percent of normal it will help ease terminal congestion or help customers get their goods delivered faster?

Well, if you look beyond the repetitive, glib rhetoric and specious reasoning of the PMA, the true intent is obvious. The PMA has deliberately done away with nearly 75 percent of the available work time solely to cut longshoremen's paychecks. Their reasoning is the longshoremen will be much more pliable and easy to intimidate if maybe they can't pay their mortgages or feed their children.

It's that brutally simple. Their unstated but obvious purpose is to force the longshoremen to submit and back down. Period. If that base motive wasn't clear when the PMA stopped hiring the night shifts, it's now abundantly clear since they locked-out the longshoremen for the weekend.

What this is, is hardball negotiations in the extreme. These foreign-owned shipping lines are perpetrating economic warfare against the United States of America. The only thing the PMA hasn't done yet is to bring out thugs to bust heads, but perhaps that's coming soon. Things do seem to be escalating.

The irony is that if conversely, it were the longshoremen who had walked off the job and gone on strike refusing to work nights, much less if they staged a weekend strike, it'd be a completely different story. In that instance, the whole country would be up in arms demanding their heads. They'd be calling for President Obama to fire them, à la Ronald Reagan and PATCO. They'd be called terrorists, holding the nation's economy hostage.

That's so very wrong. It's extremely naive to assume the PMA's lame excuses and tapestry of lies about reducing terminal congestion are even remotely valid.

Because the PMA excuses are indeed lame. If you want to move more cargo, and move it faster, you add shifts and you add workers. Not cut shifts. Is it any wonder the ports are on the brink of a complete standstill with what the PMA has done?

The vast majority of the blame for the gridlock we're presently experiencing clearly lies with the PMA and its reckless attempt to punish the workers, trying to make them submit.

Let's give blame where blame is due.

This leads to my second concern: I take issue with the bias of The Journal of Commerce's coverage of the negotiations. The JOC has been facilitating the PMA's propaganda agenda.

How so?

A good example is the way the JOC seems to accept without question the PMA's assertions that they've done away with nearly three-quarters of the work shifts to save money or to help clear terminal congestion. That simply defies reason.

Then in successive articles, the PMA statements — which are repeated over and over and over, ad nauseam — are all presented in an authoritative manner, while the ILWU statements are often presented in a more dismissive light.

And then to top it off, for the better part of the last month, the JOC has had PMA graphics prominently displayed on its home page (Data), the latest graph having the headline: Pacific Maritime Association's stats show drop in skilled labor.

So what's the overall impression the reader is to come away with? Given the disparate, favored treatment, it's obvious the PMA is the white knight. It would be extremely hard to walk away with an impression other than that.

That is not balanced reporting.

I value The Journal of Commerce for its news coverage of the industry. I even like reading opinion pieces that I don't necessarily agree with; it's enriching. But there has to be a clear line between the opinion and news. Because if the line blurs, it cheapens and degrades the publication.

 

[angelburst29]

_http://www.joc.com/port-news/longshoreman-labor/international-longshore-and-warehouse-union/west-coast-blame-game_20150213.html

The West Coast blame game.

First off, a normal workweek for longshoremen consists of 147 hours spread over three shifts in seven days — an eight-hour day shift, an eight-hour night shift, and a five-hour graveyard or "hoot owl" shift.

Now as reported by JOC.com, the Pacific Maritime Association’s supposed goals for not hiring night and, now, weekend shifts, they say, is to reduce terminal congestion, and to reduce labor costs — to quit paying premium pay for what they consider to be workers with "diminished productivity."

So what is the PMA really trying to accomplish by reducing available work? And is it likely that by reducing available worktime to 27 percent of normal it will help ease terminal congestion or help customers get their goods delivered faster?

(snip)

It's that brutally simple. Their unstated but obvious purpose is to force the longshoremen to submit and back down. Period. If that base motive wasn't clear when the PMA stopped hiring the night shifts, it's now abundantly clear since they locked-out the longshoremen for the weekend.

What this is, is hardball negotiations in the extreme. These foreign-owned shipping lines are perpetrating economic warfare against the United States of America. The only thing the PMA hasn't done yet is to bring out thugs to bust heads, but perhaps that's coming soon. Things do seem to be escalating.

(snip)

If you want to move more cargo, and move it faster, you add shifts and you add workers. Not cut shifts. Is it any wonder the ports are on the brink of a complete standstill with what the PMA has done?

The vast majority of the blame for the gridlock we're presently experiencing clearly lies with the PMA and its reckless attempt to punish the workers, trying to make them submit.

Let's give blame where blame is due.

Good article find, Rhiannon. It defines the current situation in more precise terms.

A run down of some of the facts presented, thus far:

* 29 west coast ports - that serve as the entry point of the bulk of Asia/Pac trade - into and out of the US.

* The Pacific Maritime Association (PMA) represents Port Management.

* The International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILWU) represents the Longshore Workers.

* Dockworkers have continued to work in good faith without a contract since July 1, 2014.

* Problems at the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach are a result of mismanagement by PMA and its member companies that began before the 2008 labor contract expired.

* A work slowdown during contract negotiations over the past seven months has already created logistic nightmares for American exporters, manufacturers and retailers dependent on an efficient supply chain.

* Within the past six years, terminal port congestion has steadily increased as cargo ships have more than doubled in size.

* The size of cargo vessels crossing the Pacific Ocean have increased in size from two football fields - to the equivalent of four football fields.

* These megaships require up to eight "gangs" or crews, to handle cargo.

* A normal workweek for longshoremen consists of 147 hours spread over three shifts in seven days — an eight-hour day shift, an eight-hour night shift, and a five-hour graveyard or "hoot owl" shift.

* Since July 2014 (when the labor agreement with ILWU expired), PMA reduced the number of gangs assigned to large cargo vessels to three, constituting a 75 percent reduction of workers.

* On New Year's Eve 2014, PMA announced an additional reduction in the workforce, assigning only one gang per ship during the night shift - reducing the number of crews assigned to unloading cargo by a staggering 87 percent.

* On Jan.13, 2015, night crews serving vessels were dropped by PMA altogether. "Diminished productivity."

* Direct result of PMA's actions, more than 7,000 full-time longshore workers and about 8,000 part-time or "casual" longshore workers face steeply reduced hours of work.

* Base motive by PMA - extreme Hardball negotiations and “coast-wide meltdown” - for the purpose - to force the longshoremen to submit and back down.


If I'm reading any sense into this, the PMA which represents mainly Asian Companies based in South Korea, Hong Kong, Japan, China, India, Singapore, Malaysia, New Zealand to name a few, who pay their employee's - less than - pennies on a dollar to produce goods,
have double the size of their container cargo ships from the size of two football fields - to 4, flooding the market. The mega-cargos need a labor force of "eight" gangs or crew to unload them. Instead of hiring additional worker's to handle the workload, the PMA have intentionally, manipulated the longshoremen productivity to a snail pace, intentionally causing terminal congestion amid unemployment. The intent, to cut longshoremen's paychecks, so they buckle under the pressure and intimidate any increase in wages or other benefits that will cut into their profits?

So, in a sense, Asian imports have double in capacity, due to increased size cargos but don't want to pay the extra "work load and expense" to unload them? They want "the American side" to absorb the cost - so there's cheap labor on both sides of the equation.
(They probably hired Mitt Romney as a CEO?)