Tensions have reignited between the International Longshoremen’s Association (ILA) and the United States Maritime Alliance (USMX) over contract negotiations at East and Gulf Coast ports. The ILA, representing 45,000 workers, recently walked away from talks on November 13, accusing employers of pushing for automation technology in a new master contract.
The dispute centers on the introduction of semi-automated rail-mounted gantry cranes (RMGs), which the ILA argues could jeopardize jobs, threaten national security, and risk the workforce’s future. The union claims the cranes are 95% automated, leaving workers only to complete tasks in the final stages of container handling. A study cited by the union shows that longshore workers outperform automated equipment in productivity.
The security concerns were amplified by a recent U.S. Coast Guard directive warning that some cranes made in China could pose threats to maritime operations. ILA leaders argue that the push for automation is more about maximizing corporate profits than meeting operational needs, potentially replacing good-paying jobs under the guise of progress.
The USMX counters that modernization is essential for a sustainable and greener maritime industry. They insist that technology will improve port efficiency, enabling the movement of more cargo without reducing jobs. Highlighting an example of a USMX-affiliated port, they pointed out that automation doubled container volumes and union jobs.
As negotiations remain at an impasse, both sides appear committed to their positions. The ILA has rallied its members with calls to action, while the USMX emphasizes the importance of adapting to future demands without compromising operational growth.
The outcome of this dispute will likely have significant implications for port operations, supply chains, and the broader shipping industry.