Port workers strike for first time in nearly 50 years

Tens of thousands of longshoremen at ports along the East Coast and Gulf of Mexico went on strike shortly after midnight, the first strike by the port workers’ union in nearly 50 years.

The International Longshoremen’s Association (ILA) and the U.S. Maritime Alliance (USMX) failed to negotiate a new labor agreement before the Oct. 1 deadline despite last-minute movement in negotiations that broke months of stalemate.

ILA President Harold Daggett joined union members outside Maher Terminal in Port Elizabeth, N.J., to kick off the union’s first strike since 1977, highlighting workers’ demands for higher wages and protection from automation of their jobs.

“We are now demanding $5 an hour increase in wages for each of the six years of a new ILA-USMX Master Contract,” said Daggett. “Plus, we want absolute airtight language that there will be no automation or semi-automation, and we are demanding all Container Royalty monies go to the ILA.”

The USMX said Monday evening that it had “traded counteroffers related to wages” with the ILA, the first sign of movement in months.

The union has demanded wage increases and a total ban on the automation of cranes, gates and container-moving trucks. Negotiations had broken down in June between the ILA and the USMX over an automated gate at a port in Mobile, Ala.

The USMX also said it had asked the union to extend the agreement that expired Oct. 1.

“Both sides have moved off their previous positions,” the USMX said in a statement. “We are hopeful that this could allow us to fully resume collective bargaining.”

Many retailers front-loaded shipments or diverted shipping through the West Coast in anticipation of the strike, but businesses are bracing for a strike with no clear end.

Estimates for the economic impact of the strike cover a wide range: the business research nonprofit The Conference Board puts the cost at around $540 million per day, while analysts at JPMorgan estimated the cost could be up to $5 billion daily.

Teamsters General President Sean O’Brien issued a statement of solidarity with the ILA on Monday evening, saying, “The U.S. government should stay the f‑‑k out of this fight and allow union workers to withhold their labor for the wages and benefits they have earned.”

“Any workers—on the road, in the ports, in the air—should be able to fight for a better life free of government interference. Corporations for too long have been able to rely on political puppets to help them strip working people of their inherent leverage,” O’Brien said.

While Biden dispatched senior officials to urge USMX and ILA officials to “come to a fair agreement fairly and quickly,” the president declined to invoke a legal maneuver that would have bought the parties more time to negotiate.

The Taft-Hartley Act, which allows presidents to ask a court for an 80-day “cooling off” period for strikes that “imperil the national health or safety,” was last used by President George W. Bush in 2002.

President Biden, who used another legal mechanism to avert a rail strike in 2022, said Sunday that he would not use Taft-Hartley to stop the longshoremen strike, citing “collective bargaining.”

The impending strike incensed some business leaders and Republicans. 

Rep. David Rouzer (R-N.C.) argued Monday morning that the “Biden-Harris Administration has failed to act to protect our economy and American consumers” in a post on the social platform X.

“A week-long strike would create a backlog at our ports until November,” said Rouzer, who represents Wilmington, where one of the ports to be impacted by the strike is located.

U.S. Chamber of Commerce President Suzanne Clark pushed Biden on Monday to invoke Taft-Hartley, warning it “would be unconscionable to allow a contract dispute to inflict such a shock to our economy.”

“These ports collectively handle more than 68 [percent] of all containerized exports and 56 [percent] of imports for the nation, with a daily trade value exceeding $2.1 billion,” Clark wrote. “Simply put, you have the authority to keep contract negotiations going while keeping the ports open.”

Lawmakers expressing their support for the longshoremen were also quick to call for an agreement to minimize the economic fallout.

Rep. Troy Carter (D-La.) said “both parties must come together in good faith to find a solution that respects worker rights while minimizing economic disruption.”

“Every worker deserves fair pay for their labor. Period. I fully support the International Longshoremen Association’s right to bargain for fair pay, benefits, and safe working conditions. I also recognize the significant impact a strike of this scale could have on the U.S. economy,” said Carter, who represents New Orleans, another strike site.

Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.), who represents part of Manhattan, said he is “proud to stand with [the longshoremen] as they fight for the fair wages, protections, and respect they deserve.” 

“The longshoremen are the backbone of the US economy, keeping our ports and supply chain running smoothly. During the pandemic, the longshoremen stood with us to keep shelves stocked across the nation,” Nadler said. 

“It is my hope that both parties quickly come to an agreement to prevent a strike with wide-ranging impacts on the port operators, economy, and longshoremen,” he added.

While a longshoremen strike will put pressure on the economy, including potentially pushing up the price of consumer goods and reigniting recently-tamed inflation, The Conference Board also described invoking the Taft-Hartley Act as a “political minefield so close to the election.”

Most of the major union and labor organizations endorsed Biden before he dropped out of the race in July, and quickly pivoted to back Vice President Harris in the presidential election.

Alex Hertel-Fernandez, an associate professor of international and public affairs at Columbia University and a former Labor Department official, outlined the “political calculations” of intervening in the strike five weeks before election day.

“Given that the president and vice president have been committed to supporting the labor movement, I think they understand that invoking Taft-Hartley would be seen by the labor movement as being a pretty significant threat to their autonomy and ability to bargain across the table from their employers,” Hertel-Fernandez said.

ILA President Harold Daggett said in a press release this summer that he has a “long relationship” with former President Trump and that the two had a “productive meeting” in November 2023.

According to Daggett, Trump “promised to support the ILA in its opposition to automated terminals in the U.S.,” one of the union’s top concerns.

How long the strike will last is anybody’s guess. But Hertel-Fernandez offered a message from a “cautious optimist” ahead of the strike announcement Monday.

“The parties always seem very far apart — until they’re not,” he said.