Tuesday, October 01, 2024

US ports strike causes first shutdown in 50 years

Natalie Sherman
Business reporter, BBC News
Reporting fromNew York


Tens of thousands of dockworkers have gone on strike indefinitely at ports across much of the US, threatening significant trade and economic disruption ahead of the presidential election and the busy holiday shopping season.

Members of the International Longshoremen's Association (ILA) walked out on Tuesday at 14 major ports along the east and gulf coasts, halting container traffic from Maine to Texas.

The action marks the first such shutdown in almost 50 years.

President Joe Biden has the power to suspend the strike for 80 days for further negotiations, but the White House has said he is not planning to act.


What is the strike about?


Talks have been stalled for months and the current contract between parties expired on Monday.

The White House said that President Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris were monitoring the strike closely.

"The President has directed his team to convey his message directly to both sides that they need to be at the table and negotiating in good faith - fairly and quickly."

The two sides are fighting over a six-year master contract that covers about 25,000 port workers employed in container and roll-on/roll-off operations, according to the US Maritime Alliance, known as USMX, which represents shipping firms, port associations and marine terminal operators.

On Monday, USMX said it had increased its offer, which would raise wages by almost 50%, triple employers' contributions to pension plans and strengthen health care options.

Union boss Harold Daggett has called for significant pay increases for his members, while voicing concerns about threats from automation.

USMX has accused the union of refusing to bargain, filing a complaint with labour regulators that asked them to order the union back to the table.

Under the previous contract, starting wages ranged from $20 to $39 per hour, depending on a worker's experience. Workers also receive other benefits, such as bonuses connected to container trade.

Mr Daggett has indicated the union wants to see per-hour pay increase by five dollars per year over the life of the six-year deal, which he estimated amounted to about 10% per year.

The ILA said workers are owed after shipping firm profits soared during the Covid pandemic, while inflation hit salaries. It has warned to expect a wider strike of its members, including those not directly involved in this dispute, though the exact numbers are unclear.

The union has said it represents more than 85,000 people; it claimed about 47,000 active members in its annual report to the Labor Department.

What items will be affected by the strike?

Time-sensitive imports, such as food, are likely to be among the goods first impacted.

The ports involved handle about 14% of agricultural exports shipped by sea and more than half of imports, including a significant share of trade in bananas and chocolate, according to the Farm Bureau.

Other sectors exposed to disruption include tin, tobacco and nicotine, Oxford Economics said. Clothing and footwear firms, and European carmakers, which route many of their shipments through the Port of Baltimore, will also take a hit.

Imports in the US surged over the summer, as many businesses took steps to rush shipments ahead of the strike.

"I don't think we will see immediate, significant economic impacts...but over the course of weeks, if the strike lasts that long, we can begin to see prices rise and for there to be some shortages in goods," said Seth Harris, a professor at Northeastern University and a former White House adviser on labour issues.

What will the economic impact be?


More than a third of exports and imports could be affected by the strike, hitting US economic growth to the tune of at least $4.5bn each week of the strike, according to Grace Zemmer, an associate US economist at Oxford Economics, though others have estimated the economic hit could be higher.

She said more than 100,000 people could find themselves temporarily out of work as the impact of the stoppage spreads.

"This is really a trigger event, one that will see dominoes fall over the coming months," said Peter Sand, chief analyst at ocean freight analytics firm Xeneta, warning that the stand-off also has the potential push up wider shipping costs.

That would hit consumers and businesses which tend to rely on so-called "just-in-time" supply chains for goods, he added.

How could this affect the US election?


The stand-off injects uncertainty into the US economy at a delicate time.

The economy has been slower and the unemployment rate is ticking higher as the US election approaches in six weeks.

The strike risks putting President Biden in a tricky spot.

US presidents can intervene in labour disputes that threaten national security or safety by imposing an 80-day cooling-off period, forcing workers back on the job while negotiations continue.

In 2002, Republican President George W Bush intervened to open ports after 11 days of a strike action by dockworkers on the west coast.

The US Chamber of Commerce business group has called on President Biden to take action.

"Americans experienced the pain of delays and shortages of goods during the pandemic-era supply chain backlogs in 2021. It would be unconscionable to allow a contract dispute to inflict such a shock to our economy," said Suzanne P. Clark, president and chief executive of the business group.

The ILA's Mr Daggett endorsed Democrat Biden in 2020, but has been critical of the president more recently, citing pressure on west coast dockworkers to reach a deal a year ago. He met with Donald Trump in July.

Although any strike chaos is likely to hurt Democrats, the cost of alienating allies in the labour movement just weeks before the election would be greater, said William Brucher, a professor of labor studies and employment relations at Rutgers University.

But public support of strikes could be tested by the dispute, which has been championed by Mr Daggett, who was acquitted of having links to organised crime in a 2004 case by federal prosecutors. A related civil suit remains unresolved.

Films such as the 1954 classic On the Waterfront once defined the dockworkers union's image, but Prof Brucher said he thought that historical memory had largely faded and many people shared the dockworkers' concerns about cost-of living and automation.

"As much as it could sway public opinion against the ILA, a strike by ILA members is their decision and I don't think they will be swayed by public opinion in any meaningful way," he said.

"What is more likely to happen is the pressure of a strike will likely force the employers back to the table with a much more substantial offer."


Dock worker strike shuts down ports in the East, threatening big hit to the U.S. economy

Don Lee
Tue, 1 October 2024 at 8:05 am GMT-6·4-min read


Workers take part in a port strike at Port Newark on Oct. 1, 2024, in Bayonne, N.J. (Eduardo Munoz Alvarez/Associated Press)


The union representing thousands of dock workers from Maine to Texas launched a strike Tuesday over wages and the use of automation, shutting down seaports with a work stoppage that threatens to cause significant disruption to trade and the national economy.

It was the first strike since 1977 for the International Longshoremen’s Assn., whose 47,000 members handle cargo operations at three dozen ports on the East and Gulf coasts that receive about half of U.S. imports . And it comes at a delicate time, economically and politically, as the country is emerging from a period of high inflation and is just a month ahead of national elections.

If the strike ends quickly, it isn’t expected to have big impacts on businesses or consumers. Many retailers had their products shipped earlier than usual and built up inventory in anticipation of a labor action. Some importers have transported goods by air and others have rerouted cargo to the West Coast, adding to increased traffic at the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, the busiest container complex in the U.S.


But with each passing day, economists say it will cost billions of dollars in lost trade, although some of that would be recouped later. And if the ports remain shut down for longer than a week or two, more significant and wider effects will hit the American economy.

Initially the impact may be relatively minor and even unnoticeable to most consumers, with products like European wine and perishables like bananas costing more, said Jason Miller, a supply chain management expert at Michigan State University. But after a couple of weeks, he said, automakers that produce cars in the U.S. could be forced to slow production or even impose temporary layoffs if they can’t get enough imported parts and components.

“There’s just a limit to what the system can take. You can only divert so much,” said Miller.

Idle cranes and shipping containers are seen at Port Jersey during a port strike on Oct. 1, 2024, in Bayonne. (Eduardo Munoz Alvarez/Associated Press)

The Biden administration has said that it is not considering invoking the 1947 Taft-Hartley Act to break a strike, but analysts say it may have little choice if it is not settled soon, given the potential economic and political damage it could cause.

The ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach combined had their busiest August ever this year, and both ports have prepared for increased cargo volume in anticipation of the strike. West Coast dock workers are represented by a different union, which agreed to a new contract last year.

“Port operators on the West Coast learned to operate under severe duress during the reopening of trade following pandemic-era distortions,” said Joseph Brusuelas, chief economist at the tax and consulting firm RSM US. “We think that this will partially mitigate some of those that will adversely impact trade volumes during the duration of the labor action.”

Brusuelas estimated the strike would affect about $1.3 billion in exports and $3 billion in imports daily, still a modest figure given the size of the American economy. “The major industries impacted by this action will be local transportation and warehousing and imports of autos,” he said. “Agricultural goods, coal, and petroleum figure to see the greatest short-term impact.”

The impact figures to be heaviest in places that are home to or support the biggest ports along the Atlantic and Gulf coasts, including New York-New Jersey; Savannah, Ga.; Houston; and Charleston, S.C. But businesses in California say they expect it will also touch them and consumers on the West Coast.

Third generation longshoreman Ray Bailey Jr. trustee of ILA Local 1291 encourages picketers outside the Packer Avenue Marine Terminal Port in Philadelphia. (Ryan Collerd/AP)

“If we have learned anything at all from previous supply chain disruptions, it is that the fallout results in higher cost for consumers on goods like clothing, fruits and vegetables and medical supplies,” said Patty Tschaepe, president of the Los Angeles Customs Brokers and Freight Forwarders Assn.

Longshoremen started picketing after their six-year labor contract with the United States Maritime Alliance expired at midnight.

The alliance, which represents shipping lines and terminal operators at the ports, said late Monday that the two sides had traded offers in what appeared to be a last-ditch effort to avert a strike. The union has been pressing for wage increases of 77% over six years, according to published reports. The maritime alliance said Monday that it had offered nearly 50%.

Top-scale longshoremen earn a base pay of $39 an hour. The union also has pushed hard against employers wanting to use robotics and other labor-saving technologies. The alliance said Monday that it had offered to maintain the current language on automation and semi-automation.

The union, in its latest posted statement Monday, said the ocean carriers, mostly foreign-owned, had made billions of dollars of profits on the back of union workers whose wages have been eaten away by inflation.

Neither side had an immediate comment Tuesday.

This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.

Major Longshoremen Strike Hits East Coast Ports

Dave Jamieson
Updated Tue, 1 October 2024 


Thousands of dock workers at ports along the East and Gulf coasts went on strike early Tuesday morning amid a contract dispute, halting the flow of goods with a potentially costly work stoppage.

Their union, the International Longshoremen’s Association, failed to reach a new six-year agreement with the United States Maritime Alliance, the group representing employers at ports from Maine to Texas. Workers walked off the job just as their previous contract expired.

It’s unclear how long the strike will last and how expensive it will be, but a prolonged shutdown could deal a significant blow to the economy since the workers who handle shipping containers control major commercial choke points.

The showdown also presents a political problem for President Joe Biden, who has the power to suspend the strike. Doing so would take away workers’ leverage and could hurt the union-friendly president’s relationship with organized labor.



Workers formed picket lines at major ports early Tuesday, holding signs that said “Profit over people is unacceptable” and “Fight automation, save jobs.”

Addressing workers at a port terminal in Elizabeth, N.J., Harold J. Daggett, the union’s president, said after the strike started that it would go down in history as a righteous fight against greedy corporations.

“These companies... they don’t give a fuck about us,” Daggett said in a union video posted to Facebook. “Well, we’re gonna show them they’re gonna have to give a fuck about us. Because nothing’s gonna move without us.”

The Maritime Alliance did not comment immediately on the strike, but said earlier in the day Monday that the two sides had traded counter offers and it was “hopeful” they could reach an agreement soon.

The ILA has been pushing for significant raises in its next contract. Members currently top out at a $39-per-hour base wage, and the union has been calling for a $5 raise in each year of the next agreement, or $30 over the full duration. The ILA also wants protections against automation at ports that it said would destroy jobs.

Daggett has accused the Maritime Alliance of making “lowball” and “insulting” proposals that members couldn’t accept and said the blame for a strike would fall “squarely on the shoulders” of employers.

He has also said the ILA wouldn’t hesitate to snarl commerce, predicting that car dealers, malls and construction firms would have to lay people off because they weren’t receiving goods and materials.

“These people today don’t know what a strike is,” Daggett said in a recent video the union produced. “In today’s world, I’ll cripple you. I will cripple you, and you have no idea what that means.”

Longshoremen strike at midnight at Bayport Terminal on Tuesday, Oct. 1, 2024, in Houston. (AP Photo/Annie Mulligan) via Associated Press

The Maritime Alliance had accused the union of walking away from the bargaining table in recent weeks. In September, it filed charges with the National Labor Relations Board, the federal agency that referees private sector labor disputes, asking officials to pursue an injunction forcing the ILA to negotiate.

(Dock workers on the West Coast are represented by a different union that reached a new deal with employers last year, so those ports would not be affected by the ILA’s walkout.)

The Taft-Hartley Act enables the president to intervene in strikes that impact national security, requiring work to continue amid an 80-day “cooling off” period. Robyn Patterson, a White House spokesperson, said in an email that senior officials had been in touch with the Maritime Alliance over the weekend, “urging them to come to a fair agreement fairly and quickly.”

“We’ve never invoked Taft-Hartley to break a strike and are not considering doing so now,” Patterson said.

House Republicans had called on the White House to “utilize every authority at its disposal to ensure the continuing flow of goods” in the event of a work stoppage.

On Monday, the AFL-CIO labor federation had urged lawmakers to stay out of the dispute and not undermine port workers.

Liz Shuler, the federation’s president, said employers who can count on getting an injunction to stop a strike don’t bargain “in good faith.”

“Like all other workers, longshoremen need raises just to keep up with the cost of living,” Shuler wrote in a letter to House Republicans. “They need fair contract provisions that protect their jobs from being eliminated by automation.”

In 2022, the White House and Congress intervened to prevent a massive rail strike that could have hurt the economy — a move that injured Biden’s standing among unions.

Strike Shuts Eastern US and Gulf Ports, Threatening Economy

Laura Curtis
Tue, 1 October 2024



(Bloomberg) --

Dockworkers walked out of every major port on the US East and Gulf coasts for the first time in nearly 50 years, staging a strike that could ripple across the world’s largest economy and cause political turmoil just weeks before the presidential election.

The 36 affected ports have the combined capacity to handle as much as half of all US trade volumes, and the closures immediately halt container operations and auto shipments. Energy supplies and bulk cargo won’t be directly affected. Some exceptions will be made to allow for the movement of military goods and cruise ships.

The significance of a work stoppage at every major container port from Houston to Miami and New York-New Jersey depends on how long the strike lasts. The economic loss from the shutdown, which began at 12:01 Tuesday morning Eastern Standard Time, will be between $3.8 billion to $4.5 billion a day, according to JPMorgan Chase & Co.

Subscribe to the Bloomberg Daybreak podcast on Apple, Spotify or anywhere you listen.​​​​​​

Shipping congestion resulting from a week-long strike would take about a month to clear, according to Grace Zwemmer at Oxford Economics.

Shares of Denmark’s A.P. Moller-Maersk A/S and Germany’s Hapag-Lloyd AG fell on Tuesday, after both container lines gained more than 11% in September.

The International Longshoremen’s Association is seeking higher wages and a rollback of the language on automation in a six-year contract that expired at midnight. Union leader Harold Daggett has for months threatened a strike starting on Oct. 1 if no deal is reached before the deadline. The last time East and Gulf coast dockworkers went on strike was in 1977.

“We are prepared to fight as long as necessary, to stay out on strike for whatever period of time it takes,” Daggett said in a statement posted to Facebook. The last offer from the companies “fell far short of what ILA rank-and-file members are demanding in wages and protections against automation.”

The ocean carriers and terminal operators represented by the US Maritime Alliance, also known as USMX, have accused the ILA of refusing to negotiate since the union called off talks back in June. A strike was all but certain until Monday afternoon, when reports emerged that the White House has been in communication with the two sides over the weekend and some progress has been made on wages.

President Joe Biden, who prides himself on being pro-union, has said the dispute is a matter for collective bargaining and he wouldn’t invoke his authority under national security laws to order dockworkers back to the ports while negotiations continue.

Trade, transportation and retail industry groups have been urging the White House to intervene to limit damage from the strike. Container carriers are preparing to impose surcharges tied to the disruption, raising the overall cost of shipping.

$2.1 Billion a Day

“It would be unconscionable to allow a contract dispute to inflict such a shock to our economy,” Suzanne Clark, CEO of the US Chamber of Commerce, wrote in a letter to Biden on Monday.

“Taft-Hartley would provide time for both parties in negotiation to reach a deal on a new labor contract,” Clark continued, referring to the 1947 congressional act that allows a president to intervene in labor disputes that involved national security.

Estimates from the National Association of Manufacturers show the strike jeopardizes $2.1 billion in trade daily, and the total economic damage could reduce GDP by as much as $5 billion a day. NAM President and CEO Jay Timmons urged Biden to force a resumption of operations while negotiations continue.

“The president can protect manufacturers and consumers by exercising his authority, and we hope he will act quickly,” Timmons said in a statement late Monday.

The Teamsters union issued a statement Monday urging the Biden administration to stay out of the dispute. ILA leader Daggett has warned the White House not to intervene, and said if forced back to the ports, dockworkers would handle fewer containers than usual, slowing operations.

The union hasn’t endorsed a presidential candidate, though according to Daggett, former President Donald Trump “promised to support the ILA in its opposition to automated terminals” during a Mar-a-Lago meeting last fall. Neither Trump nor Vice President Kamala Harris has drawn public attention to the strike threat.

“Moments ago, the first large-scale eastern dockworker strike in 47 years began at ports from Maine to Texas, including at the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey,” New York Governor Kathy Hochul said a statement just after midnight.

“In preparation for this moment, New York has been working around the clock to ensure that our grocery stores and medical facilities have the essential products they need,” she said.

Meanwhile, the flow of goods has already been redirected by the threat of disruption. Many importers brought their goods in early or through West Coast ports to mitigate the risk and pad inventories.

Port terminals along the coasts wound down their operations ahead of the midnight deadline, and railroads are also pulling back service.

“The most important thing is going to be for the carriers, shippers and workers to come to terms,” said Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg on Bloomberg Television’s “Balance of Power.” “There’s really no substitute for the ports being up and running.”

--With assistance from Josh Wingrove, Cailley LaPara, John Harney, Joe Carroll and Andrew Langley.

US East Coast dockworkers strike, halting half the nation's ocean shipping

Doyinsola Oladipo and David Shepardson
Updated Tue, 1 October 2024 

Scroll back up to restore default view.

NEW YORK (Reuters) -U.S. East Coast and Gulf Coast dockworkers began a strike early on Tuesday, their first large-scale stoppage in nearly 50 years, halting the flow of about half the nation's ocean shipping after negotiations for a new labor contract broke down over wages.

The strike blocks everything from food to automobile shipments across dozens of ports from Maine to Texas, in a disruption analysts warned will cost the economy billions of dollars a day, threaten jobs and potentially stoke inflation.

The International Longshoremen's Association union representing 45,000 port workers had been negotiating with the United States Maritime Alliance (USMX) employer group for a new six-year contract ahead of a midnight Monday deadline.

The ILA said in a statement on Tuesday it shut down all ports from Maine to Texas at 12:01 a.m. ET (0401 GMT) after rejecting USMX's final proposal made on Monday, adding the offer fell "far short of the demands of its members to ratify a new contract".

The ILA's leader, Harold Daggett, has said employers such as container ship operator Maersk and its APM Terminals North America have not offered appropriate pay increases or agreed to demands to stop port automation projects that threaten jobs.

The USMX said in a statement on Monday it had offered to hike wages by nearly 50%, up from a prior proposal. Daggett, meanwhile, said the union is pushing for a 61.5% pay increase, according to CNBC.

"We are prepared to fight as long as necessary, to stay out on strike for whatever period of time it takes, to get the wages and protections against automation our ILA members deserve," Daggett said on Tuesday.

USMX did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Hundreds of dockworkers demonstrated on Tuesday at the Port of New York and New Jersey, one of the largest ports affected, carrying signs and shouting slogans as music blared and vendors hawked food.

Daggett arrived to rally them with cheers of "ILA all the way!"

"Got to keep it going, got to stay strong. You deserve it," Daggett told them.

The strike, the ILA's first major stoppage since 1977, is worrying businesses that rely on ocean shipping to export their wares or secure crucial imports. It affects 36 ports - including New York, Baltimore and Houston - that handle a range of containerized goods from bananas to clothing to cars.

The walkout could cost the American economy roughly $5 billion a day, JP Morgan analysts estimate, as shipments are disrupted from busy terminals.

The National Retail Federation on Tuesday called on President Joe Biden's administration to use its federal authority to halt the strike, saying the walkout could have "devastating consequences" for the economy.

U.S. Representative Sam Graves, a Republican who chairs the House of Representatives' Transportation Committee, called on Biden "to immediately intervene to avoid this unnecessary harm to our economy."

Biden officials have repeatedly said he will not do so, while urging both sides to come to an agreement.

Retailers in recent months have accelerated holiday importsand are moving other shipments to the West Coast.

"We expect the strike itself to last for five to seven days until a government intervention ... but the ripple effect is likely to be felt across the whole network into Europe, into Asia for at least into January, February," said Peter Sand, chief analyst at shipping pricing platform Xeneta.

There are nearly 100,000 containers in New York City-area ports alone waiting to be unloaded, now frozen by the strike, and 35 container ships headed to New York over the coming week, said Rick Cotton, executive director of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey.

The union is "holding the entire country over a barrel," said Steve Hughes, CEO of HCS International, which specializes in automotive sourcing and shipping. "I'm really afraid that it is going to be ugly."

The dispute is also wedging labor-friendly Democrat Biden into a virtual no-win position with Vice President Kamala Harris in a razor-thin race for the White House with Republican former President Donald Trump.

White House Chief of Staff Jeff Zients and top economic adviser Lael Brainard urged USMX board members at a meeting on Monday to resolve the dispute fairly and quickly, a White House official said.

The White House on Tuesday said in a statement that it is monitoring the effects on the supply chain and assessing ways to address potential impacts, noting the initial effect on consumers is expected to be limited.

Officials told Reuters on condition of anonymity they are hoping for a short strike, noting the two sides had resumed talks late on Sunday and had narrowed their differences on Monday.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture said on Tuesday that it does not expect "significant changes to food prices or availability in the near term."

BACKUP PLANS

Retailers accounting for about half of all container shipping volume have been busily implementing backup plans as they head into their all-important winter holiday sales season.

Many of the big players rushed in Halloween and Christmas merchandise early to avoid any strike-related disruptions, incurring extra costs to ship and store those goods.

Retail behemoth Walmart, the largest U.S. container shipper, and membership warehouse club operator Costco say they are doing everything they can to mitigate any impact.

New York Governor Kathy Hochul said the state expects no immediate impact on food supplies or essential goods but said impacts could widen depending on how long it lasts.

"It’s critical for USMX and the ILA to reach a fair agreement soon that respects workers and ensures a flow of commerce through our ports," she said on Tuesday.

In Copenhagen, Maersk shares dropped almost 5% on Tuesday, with profit-taking following recent gains, as investors had been expecting significant increases in freight rates due to the strike, which would boost shipping companies' earnings.

The Danish company has said it would introduce a port disruption surcharge on all cargo moving to and from the U.S. East Coast and Gulf Coast terminals beginning Oct. 21 ranging from $1,500 to $3,780 a container.

(Reporting by Doyinsola Oladipo; Additional reporting by Gursimran Kaur, Nilutpal Timsina, Shivani Tanna and Shubham Kalia in Bengaluru, David Shepardson in Washington and Stine Jacobsen in Copenhagen; Writing by Richard Valdmanis and Miyoung Kim; Editing by Miral Fahmy, Peter Graff, Chizu Nomiyama and Jonathan Oatis)


A port strike could cost the economy $5 billion per day, here's what it could mean for you
Reuters
Mon, 30 September 2024 at 9:20 am GMT-6·5-min read



Some 45,000 union workers could walk off the job at seaports on the U.S. East and Gulf Coasts on Oct. 1, cutting off vital trade arteries just weeks ahead of the nation's presidential election.

A JPMorgan analysis projected that a strike could cost the U.S. economy $5 billion daily.

The strike could hit 36 ports that handle about one-half of U.S. ocean imports. That could affect availability of a range of goods from bananas to clothing to cars shipped via container, while creating weeks-long backlogs at ports. It could also stoke shipping cost increases that may be passed on to voters already frustrated with housing and food inflation, according to logistics experts.
What's behind the potential port strike?

The International Longshoremen's Association (ILA) union representing workers at ports from Maine to Texas and the United States Maritime Alliance employer group appear to have hit an impasse over pay. The current six-year contract expires at midnight on Sept. 30.

A strike at all East Coast and Gulf of Mexico ports would be the first for the ILA since 1977.

The White House said it is not trying to help broker a deal, as it did last year during West Coast talks, and a Biden administration official has said the president would not use his federal powers to block a strike.

A widespread and lengthy strike could cause shortages and cost increases across a broad range of industries.
What do port workers do?

Longshoremen, also referred to as stevedores, handle cargo from incoming ships. They mostly work on container ships, but also do some work with car carriers and cruise ships.

They operate cranes that pluck containers from ships to "lashing," securing cargo containers to prevent them from falling off during transit, and process paperwork.
Ports handled $38B in vehicle imports last year

Ports covered by the contract handled $37.8 billion worth of vehicle imports during the 12 months ended June 30, 2024, according to S&P Global Market Intelligence. The Port of Baltimore, Maryland, leads the nation in car shipments.

Auto parts are also a key import on the East Coast and Gulf of Mexico, with shipments from Europe more difficult to reroute than those from China, logistics experts said.

The ports also lead the U.S. in shipments of machinery, fabricated steel and precision instruments, coming in at $97.4 billion, $16.2 billion and $15.7 billion, respectively, S&P Global Market Intelligence data showed.
US agriculture exports, imports at risk in port strike

About 14% of all U.S. waterborne agricultural exports, by volume, would be at risk from a strike. Over a one-week period, the potential value of those exports is estimated at $318 million, according to the American Farm Bureau Federation.

Additionally, 53% of U.S. waterborne agricultural imports by volume are vulnerable to a strike, leading to a potential economic impact of over $1.1 billion per week, the Farm Bureau said.

Three-quarters of the nation's banana imports from countries like Guatemala and Ecuador land at ports on the East and Gulf Coasts, said Jason Miller, interim chair of Michigan State University's department of supply chain management.

Separately, the U.S. imports coffee and cocoa in large volumes and exports cotton.

A strike also would affect container exports of soybeans, soybean meal and other products and would have a significant impact on chilled or frozen meat and eggs, said Mike Steenhoek, executive director of the Soy Transportation Coalition.

The $18-billion-a-year U.S. beef and pork export market and the $5.8 billion poultry and egg export sector relies on refrigerated containers that cannot sit idle for long.

About 45% of all waterborne U.S. pork exports and 30% of beef exports were shipped via East Coast and Gulf Coast ports in the first seven months of this year, said U.S. Meat Export Federation spokesperson Joe Schuele.

More than a quarter of all U.S. egg and egg product exports and around 70% of all poultry meat exports are shipped from ports along the East and Gulf Coasts, according to Customs data and the USA Poultry & Egg Export Council.

The affected ports also handle more than 91% of containerized imports and 69% of containerized exports of U.S. pharmaceutical products, according to Everstream Analytics.

More than one-third of containers departing the U.S. with lifesaving medications leaves from the port in Norfolk, Virginia, while nearly one-third of containerized pharmaceutical imports enter the country through the port in Charleston, South Carolina.
Retailers rushing shipments of holiday goods

Retailers account for roughly half of all container volumes. Many U.S. retailers already have rushed in shipments of year-end holiday goods.

The ports that would be affected by a potential strike bring over half of the nation's knitted and non-knitted apparel, valued at $32.8 billion combined, as well furniture valued at $23.4 billion, according to S&P Global Market Intelligence.

Though the Gulf Coast ports of Houston and New Orleans are major oil and gas shipment hubs, those commodities would remain largely unaffected by a strike involving more labor-intensive container cargo. The same applies to coal exports from Norfolk, Virginia, experts said.

The ILA, however, has pledged to handle military cargo and to work passenger cruise ships during a strike.
One-week shutdown could lead to six-week recovery, Maersk estimates

In broad terms, a strike would raise costs for shipping while also imposing lengthy delays.

The top five ports in the negotiating group - New York and New Jersey; Savannah, Georgia; Houston; Norfolk; and Charleston - handled more than 1.5 million 20-foot equivalent units (TEUs) valued at $83.7 billion in August, according to John McCown, senior fellow at the Center for Maritime Strategy. About two-thirds of that cargo was inbound, while the remainder was outbound, he said.

Trade disruptions from a work stoppage would begin immediately, causing supply chain problems, logistics experts warned.

Analysts at Sea-Intelligence, a Copenhagen-based shipping advisory firm, estimated that it could take anywhere from four to six days to clear the backlog from a one-day strike.

Maersk, one of the largest providers of ocean transportation and a member of the employer group, warned that a one-week shutdown could require up to six weeks of recovery time, "with significant backlogs and delays compounding with each passing day."

(Reporting by Lisa Baertlein in Los Angeles, Karl Plume and Tom Polansek in Chicago, Marcelo Teixeira in New York and David Shepardson and Jarrett Renshaw in Washington; Editing by Anna Driver, William Maclean and Deepa Babington)

This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: What to expect in port shutdown strike 2024: Holiday shipping delays


45,000 Dockworkers Shut Down the East and Gulf Coasts. They Need to Stop Arms Shipments Too


Dockworkers shut down the East Coast and Gulf of Mexico ports in a strike led by the International Longshoremen’s Association (ILA). This strike has the potential to shake up the US economy just weeks before the presidential election and could disrupt the shipping of weapons to Israel if workers go further.



Mike Pappas 
October 1, 2024
LEFT VOICE USA



Over 47,000 workers with the International Longshoremen’s Association (ILA), which handle nearly half of all U.S. import and export cargo, have gone on strike after their contract expired at midnight on October 1. The workers throughout 36 U.S. ports on the East and Gulf coasts are waging the first port strike on the East Coast since 1977 after negotiations with United States Maritime Alliance (USMX) failed. The ILA is demanding annual wage increases of $5 per hour, along with higher starting wages, and improvements to healthcare and retirement benefits. The union is also demanding increased protection from job loss due to automation.

A strike of this magnitude could have huge impacts on the economy and will stop the flow of everything from food to automobiles at major ports. Even a short work stoppage could have large effects on downstream supply chains for weeks to come.

This could also affect the broader economic and political picture weeks ahead of the U.S. presidential election, which is projected to be a very tight race between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump. President Joe Biden has already said that he won’t use the Taft-Hartley Act, which allows the president to intervene in labor disputes that supposedly threaten national security or safety by imposing an 80-day cooling-off period — essentially stopping a strike. Such measures were taken, for example, back in 2002 when the port strike threatened the preparation for the Iraq war.

“It’s collective bargaining. I don’t believe in Taft-Hartley,” Biden told reporters. The looming strike puts the Biden administration in a difficult place as he has framed himself as the “most pro-union president in history” but ideally would like to avoid a lengthy strike that could affect the economy so deeply this close to an election. He certainly had no qualms about intervening on behalf of the bosses in the 2022 railway strike, using the union-busting Railway Labor Act to impose a deal on workers to prevent the economy from taking a massive hit.

Union President Harold Daggett has been outspoken throughout negotiations. As reported by Politico, he did not ask government officials for help avoiding a strike and even criticized a union deal by West Coast dock workers to avoid a strike last year. Daggett has also been openly critical of Biden’s labor record and threatened that the union could hurt the economy if the union’s demands are not met. “In today’s world, I’ll cripple you,” he said recently in a video post. “I will cripple you.”

But despite the perceived public strife between the union and Biden administration, part of the reason the administration likely hasn’t intervened as strongly is not because President Biden is pro-union, but because Daggett himself has pledged the union will continue shipping weapons for military operations even as workers strike. As Daggett said,

We continue our pledge to never let our brave American troops down for their valour and service and we will proudly continue to work all military shipments beyond October 1st, even if we are engaged in a strike.

This exception for weapons shipments prevents the strike from fully clashing with the interests of U.S. imperialism. It also means that instead of using the power of the union to fight the genocide in Gaza and Israel’s regional escalations, Daggett and other union leaders are going along with it. To unleash the full power of the strike this exception must be reversed.

The ILA strike comes in context of a recent uptick in labor activity throughout the United States. As Left Voice reported, on September 12, 33,000 Boeing factory workers broke onto the national scene and made headlines with what was, at that point, the biggest strike of the year. At the same time, the UAW is getting ready for multiple possible strikes against Stellantis in response to recent job cuts; in Los Angeles County workers may go on strike on October 10.

In 2023 alone, striking worker totals increased by 141 percent. This increase was mainly due to four large strikes — SAG-AFTRA, the Coalition of Kaiser Permanente Unions, Los Angeles Unified School District workers, and the UAW — that accounted for 65% of the workers who went on strike last year.

And while strike activity isn’t at the levels seen in the 1960s and 1970s, the uptick in working class militancy and increasing use of strikes as a tool to fight is movement in a positive direction. The working class is flexing its muscles, demonstrating its strategic power within the economy. The hope is that these struggles extend beyond fighting for demands in the workplace and outwards. From addressing rising inflation, unaffordable rents, lack of childcare options, and rising benefit costs to fighting against the genocide in Palestine or the bombing campaign in Lebanon, workers mobilized can win if workplace struggles are combined with our social movements. By using the power of labor, we can confront genocide and imperialism and fight against the economic crises caused and exacerbated by capitalism. For this reason, it is vital that we give our support to the striking port workers while also demanding that the union leadership stop the shipment of weapons.
Julian Assange says he 'pleaded guilty to journalism' to gain freedom

Former whistleblower Jullian Assange said he 'pleaded guilty to journalism' to protect his freedom after being arrested for espionage.

The New Arab Staff & Agencies
01 October, 2024

'I eventually chose freedom over an unrealisable justice,' Assange said [GETTY]


Julian Assange, the founder of whistleblower media group WikiLeaks, told European lawmakers on Tuesday that his guilty plea to US espionage accusations was necessary because legal and political efforts to protect his freedom were insufficient.

"I eventually chose freedom over an unrealisable justice," Assange said in his first public comments since his release from prison, addressing a committee at the Council of Europe, the international body best known for its human rights convention.

Assange, 53, returned to his home country of Australia in June after a deal was struck for his release. He pleaded guilty to violating US espionage law in it, ending a 14-year British legal odyssey.

"I am free today after years of incarceration because I pleaded guilty to journalism, pleaded guilty to seeking information from a source, I pleaded guilty to obtaining information from a source and I pleaded guilty to informing the public what that information was," he said.

WikiLeaks in 2010 released hundreds of thousands of classified US military documents on Washington's wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the largest security breaches of their kind in US military history, along with swaths of diplomatic cables.


Assange was indicted years later under the Espionage Act.

A report by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe concluded Assange was a political prisoner and called for Britain to hold an inquiry into whether he had been exposed to inhuman treatment.

Dressed in a black suit with a burgundy tie and a slight white beard, Assange sat between his wife, Stella, and WikiLeaks' editor, Kristinn Hrafnsson, reading his initial remarks from sheets of paper.

"I am yet not fully equipped to speak about what I have endured," he said, adding: "Isolation has taken its toll which I am trying to unwind."

Speaking freely during a subsequent question-and-answer session, Assange looked moved when he told lawmakers that the plea deal barred him from ever bringing a case to defend himself against the US's spying accusations.

"There will never be a hearing into what happened," he said.

His wife, whom he married while in a London jail, said last month he would need time to regain his health and sanity after his long incarceration.

When asked about his plans, Assange said the Strasbourg hearing, which aimed to raise awareness of the need to protect whistleblowers and informers, was "a first step."

He said that adapting to everyday life after years of imprisonment included some "tricky things", like learning to be a father to two children who grew up without him and "becoming a husband again, including with a mother-in-law," drawing some laughter from the crowd.

Assange was first arrested in Britain in 2010 on a European arrest warrant after Swedish authorities said they wanted to question him over sex-crime allegations that were later dropped. He fled to Ecuador's embassy, where he remained for seven years, to avoid extradition to Sweden.

In 2019, he was dragged out of the embassy and transferred to London's Belmarsh high-security jail for failing to pay bail.

(Reuters)

WikiLeaks founder Assange tells EU rights body he 'chose freedom over justice'

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has told the Council of Europe he was released after years of incarceration only because he pleaded guilty to doing 'journalism', warning that freedom of expression was now at a 'dark crossroads'.


Issued on: 01/10/2024
Wikileaks founder Julian Assange and his wife Stella Assange raise their arms as they arrive at the Council of Europe in Strasbourg, eastern France, Tuesday, 1 October, 2024. AP - Pascal Bastien


By:RFI

Addressing the Council of Europe rights body at its Strasbourg headquarters – in his first public comments since his release in June – Assange said, "I am not free today because the system worked. I am free today after years of incarceration because I pleaded guilty to journalism."

The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe had issued a report expressing alarm at Assange's treatment, saying it had a "chilling effect on human rights".

Julian Assange spent most of the last 14 years either holed up in the Ecuadorian embassy in London to avoid arrest, or locked up at Belmarsh Prison, south of London.

He was released under a plea bargain this summer, after serving a sentence for publishing hundreds of thousands of confidential US government documents

The trove included searingly frank US State Department descriptions of foreign leaders, accounts of extrajudicial killings and intelligence gathering against allies.

Assange returned to Australia and since then had not publicly commented on his legal woes or his years behind bars.

Facing a potential 175-year sentence, "I eventually chose freedom over unrealisable justice ... Justice for me is now precluded," Assange said, referring to the conditions of his plea bargain.

Speaking calmly and flanked by his wife Stella, who fought for his release, he added,"Journalism is not a crime, it is a pillar of a free and informed society."

"The fundamental issue is simple. Journalists should not be prosecuted for doing their jobs," Assange said.

The WikiLeaks founder said that he could have lost years more of his life had he tried to fight his case all the way.

"Perhaps, ultimately, if it had gotten to the Supreme Court of the United States and I was still alive ... I might have won," Assange said in his address."

WikiLeaks founder Assange en-route to final US court hearing ahead of release
Assange case still divisive

Assange remains visibly affected by his experience, tiring towards the end of the session even as he thanked "all the people who have fought for my liberation".

Stella Assange told reporters after the committee hearing, "It was truly exceptional that he came here today ... He needs time to be able to recover".

"He's only been free for a few weeks and we're really just in the process of starting from zero ... or from less than zero," she added.

Asked what the next moves for WikiLeaks might be, the site's editor-in-chief Kristinn Hrafnsson told reporters Assange was "committed as ever to the basic principles that he's always abided by – transparency, justice, quality journalism".

Assange's case remains deeply contentious.

Supporters hail him as a champion of free speech and say he was persecuted by authorities and unfairly imprisoned.

Detractors see him as a reckless blogger whose uncensored publication of ultra-sensitive documents put lives at risk and jeopardised US security.

French parliament votes against handing asylum to Wikileaks founder Assange
Pardon campaign

Assange is still campaigning for a US presidential pardon for his conviction under the Espionage Act.

US President Joe Biden – who is likely to issue some pardons before leaving office next January – has previously described him as a "terrorist".

But Chelsea Manning, the army intelligence analyst who leaked documents to Assange, had her 35-year sentence commuted by President Barack Obama in 2017.

Assange's timing and his choice of venue for his first post-release appearance have puzzled some observers.

The Council of Europe brings together the 46 signatory states of the European Convention on Human Rights, with little say over Assange's legal fate.

Holly Cullen, a law professor at the University of Western Australia, told AFP ahead of the hearing that in criticising the United States, Assange might "need to be a bit more restrained until the pardon issue is resolved".

(with newswires)

Julian Assange breaks silence at landmark Council of Europe hearing


Frederick Florin/AFP
Organisation:
RSF_en

After maintaining a low profile since his release from prison in June, WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has spoken publicly for the first time in an address to a committee hearing of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE), reaffirming the dangers his prosecution posed for journalism and press freedom. Reporters Without Borders (RSF) welcomes the PACE hearing and report, and urges the Assembly to pass the accompanying resolution.

In a hearing in Strasbourg, France on 1 October, Assange addressed the PACE Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights in the context of the Committee’s report on ‘The detention and conviction of Julian Assange and their chilling effects on human rights’. Assange gave an introductory statement of 22 minutes, then fielded questions from PACE members for nearly an hour, noting he was tired shortly before concluding. This marked the first time Assange has spoken in public since a plea deal enabled his release from Belmarsh prison at the end of June. Assange is expected to return to Australia to continue his recovery following the hearing.

In his address, Assange emphasised his belief that he had been targeted for journalism. "The fundamental issue is simple: Journalists should not be prosecuted for doing their jobs,” he said. He noted that he had chosen freedom “over unreliable justice”, and stated “I am not free today because the system worked. I am free today after years of incarceration because I pled guilty to journalism.” He warned that journalists remained under threat in Europe, urging PACE to act to ensure that what happened to him can never happen again.

Julian Assange’s address to the Council of Europe was a landmark moment, both for his own case but also for the broader fight to strengthen press freedom protections in Europe. We welcome the Parliamentary Assembly’s report highlighting the chilling effect of Assange’s prosecution, and urge the swift passage of the accompanying resolution. Like much of the international community, the Council of Europe did far too little during Assange’s period of detention. We hope that his statement in the Palais and the damning details of the report will serve as a wake-up call on the need for concrete action to ensure that such a case cannot happen in Europe again.
Rebecca Vincent
RSF Director of Campaigns


PACE will conduct a debate in its full plenary session on 2 October and vote on the resolution accompanying the report. RSF has urged its passage in the interest of strengthening protections for press freedom and journalism in the Council of Europe region.

RSF’s Director of Campaigns Rebecca Vincent had previously given oral testimony to the Committee on 26 June, and had met with PACE Rapporteur Thórhildur Sunna Ævarsdóttir during her fact-finding mission to London in May. RSF had campaigned vigorously for Assange’s release because of the dangerous implications his prosecution held for journalism and press freedom around the world.

The United Kingdom, a Member State of the Council of Europe, is ranked 23rd out of 180 countries in RSF’s 2024 World Press Freedom Index.

Published on 01.10.2024
It’s back-to-school day in Haiti, but teachers have fled and the homeless occupy schools


Jacqueline Charles, Johnny Fils-Aimé
Tue, October 1, 2024 

Roc Auxène walked the premises of one of the oldest schools, Lycée Pinchinat de Jacmel in this sun-swept southern city on a recent afternoon, wondering where to begin.

Several of the classrooms are condemned. Fissures from the 2010 earthquake, more than 14 years ago, still have not been repaired and hundreds of desks and chairs that were ordered more than three years ago are still stuck in Port-au-Prince, three hours away, through gang-controlled territories.

“We have a need of 7,050 school benches, 971 chairs and 227 chalkboards,” said Auxène, the ministry of education’s director for Southeast Haiti. “I’ve been director for three years and because of the lack of security, the ministry of education has never been able to get us benches and the director before me never received any.”


If that’s not daunting enough, Auxène is also looking to fill between 500 and 600 vacancies at the government-owned schools in the rural coastal region. The positions include more than 250 teaching vacancies along with school secretaries, inspectors and other employees who have either died, retired or migrated to the United States. An estimated 30% of teachers across Haiti have migrated to the U.S. and elsewhere, which means some classrooms will not have a teacher on Tuesday. In other cases, teachers have been waiting for years for paychecks because their paperwork still has not been properly filed in the system.

“Things are very difficult,” said Auxène, himself a history teacher.

Roc Auxène, a history teacher and regional director for the Ministry of Education for the southeast region of Haiti, walks across the yard at Lycée Pinchinat of Jacmel on August 24, 2024. The school is among several UNICEF, the United Nations’ child welfare agency, is trying to repair to accommodate thousands displaced students fleeing gang violence.More

As the new school year in Haiti starts on Tuesday, the country’s education system remains broken. The government and partners like UNICEF, which has been sounding the alarm about the impact of the gang crisis on children, face enormous challenges: Hundreds of thousands of children have joined the ranks of the displaced, schools in the capital and surrounding cities remain occupied by the homeless and regional ministry of education directors like Auxène try to do a lot with very little.

“We can’t even begin to count how many students we are getting,” he said. “With the support of UNICEF, we’ve started to do a lot of work; we’re making some repairs in schools and hope to put up tents for some temporary classrooms so we can accommodate the students.”

In the Great South area alone, which includes the Southeast, Southwest, Nippes and Grand’Anse regions, there are more than 100,000 school-aged children who have been forced to flee their homes because of gang violence. At least a quarter of those students, 25,000, are in the southeast, which includes the seaside town of Jacmel.

“For many families in Haiti, the start of the school year is a cherished moment of hope and renewal, but with more than 270,000 people fleeing to the south, displaced families are facing daunting challenges in securing education for their children,” Bruno Maes, who ended his term as UNICEF’s representative in Haiti over the weekend, said when he visited the region in September. “Local services are struggling to accommodate the influx of displaced school-aged children as well because of the disruptions from ongoing violence.”


A classroom at Lycée Pinchinat de Jacmel school. Despite the general state of disrepair the building will open for classes on Tuesday, October 1, 2024.

Over the summer, UNICEF’s education officers fanned out across the country to help rehabilitate damaged schools, set up temporary learning spaces and provide educational materials. The United Nations child welfare agency also facilitated cash transfers to affected families to help cover school-related expenses. But Maes and his team acknowledged there just isn’t enough money to go around. A U.N. appeal for $674 million in humanitarian assistance for Haiti still remains underfunded at barely 30% of the total.

As Auxène toured the combined middle and high school in the center of Jacmel, he was joined by UNICEF Education Officer Wadler Raymond, who is responsible for the Great South. The school was founded in 1860, though its building is more recent.

Raymond said UNICEF was checking out the structure for repairs and to see how it could accommodate some of the displaced students in the city. The faded building seemed more like a candidate for a tear down than a rehab. Its light fixtures didn’t work, the concrete stairs were crumbling and there were deep cracks even in the parts that had not been condemned.


The entrance to aclassroom at Lycée Pinchinat school in Jacmel. Despite the general state of disrepair the building will open for classes.

Last school year the building managed to accommodate 500 students. This year there is no telling what enrollment will look like. That depends on whether parents can afford costs of school uniforms, books, fees and transportation. And in the case of students forced out of their homes because of the gang violence, it also depends on whether they were able to get their files from their last school and take required year-end exams.

“Some parents when you ask them for a telephone number, it’s the phone number of a neighbor because they don’t have one or they say they have none,” Auxène said. “They are dealing with many problems.”


First graders attend class during summer classes at École National Louis Borno de Léogâne in Léogâne, Haiti. Many of the students were displaced by the gang violence in Port-au-Prince and neighboring Gressier.

While UNICEF is actively overseeing initiatives to ensure that displaced children have the opportunity to return to school, money remains a problem.

As Tuesday approached, the agency still had not secured the funds to make repairs to Lycée Pinchinat de Jacmel, although Raymond, the UNICEF officer, said they did manage to put 10 tents in the yard to use as classrooms.
Back-to-school help

Haiti’s armed gangs have forced more than 703,000 people out of their homes, many of them school-aged children who along with their parents have sought shelter in classrooms and school yards.

On Monday, Prime Minister Garry Conille took to social media to share a graphic of the government’s ongoing efforts to help by providing 2 million free books in Creole and 20,000 gourdes — about $150 — to 200,000 parents.

“Education and quality work for the youth is one of the government’s priorities to create hope and fight insecurity,” he said on X, adding that the ministry of education has been given a 24% budget increase this year.

A first grader boy uses a small tree branch as a pointer as he recites in front of class during summer classes at Ecole National Louis Borno de Léogâne in Léogâne, Haiti.

The money, Conille said, will be used to train more young teachers, distribute more books and provide food for school cafeterias with the help of the World Food Program. He’s expected to travel to the South by helicopter Tuesday to officially launch the reopening of the school year.

“We won’t be satisfied until all children have the same chance to go to school from the first day, everywhere in the country,” he said.
People living in schools

On Monday, the minister in charge of humanitarian affairs, Herwill Gaspard, visited one of the dozens of schools in Port-au-Prince currently occupied by people who have fled their homes. Gaspard said there are 39 schools across the capital occupied by people chased out of their homes by armed gangs and the government is working with the U.N.’s International Organization for Migration to relocate them.

He visited the encampment at the National School Argentine Bellegarde on Ruelle Vaillant, which has 1,580 people sleeping in its classrooms and elsewhere on the grounds.

Gaspard acknowledged that the process of relocating people is difficult. One reason is money. The 50,000 Haitian gourdes — about $380 — IOM is offering to entice them to leave isn’t enough to put a roof over their heads.

“We ask them, ‘What is 50,000 gourdes going to do for us?’” said David Desrosier, one of the displaced. “It’s bizarre. There are people here with four, five children.”

Derosier said he recently went searching for a place to rent. Everywhere he went in the capital, owners of rental properties were asking for prices in U.S. dollars, between $700 and $800, in a country where the majority of people live on less than $2 a day.

Myrlène Baptiste, who has also been displaced, questioned the amount the U.N. agency is offering. “What are we going to do with 50,000 gourdes? 50,000 gourdes cannot pay rent.”

 

Intergeneration research shows immigrants to the US assimilate as well now as they did over a century ago

Intergeneration research shows immigrants to the United States assimilate as well now as they did in the past
In the past, sons of poor immigrants experienced more economic mobility than the sons of 
White US-born fathers. These figures compare the income rank of sons raised at the 
25th percentile of the income distribution by fathers born in various European countries or
 in the United States. The sons were observed in their childhood homes in 1880 or 1910,
 and then in adulthood in 1910 or 1940, where we measure their rank in the income 
distribution. The underlying data are linked census files. Illustrations by Patti Isaacs,
 based on Abramitzky et al. (2). From Streets of Gold by Leah Boustan and Ran 
Abramitzky (3) copyright © 2022. Reprinted by permission of PublicAffairs, an imprint of
 Hachette Book Group, Inc. Credit: PNAS Nexus (2024). DOI: 10.1093/pnasnexus/pgae344

Children of immigrants to the United States typically incorporate themselves into US economic and cultural life, and this pattern of assimilation has not markedly changed in over a century. Today, one in seven US residents was born abroad, rates similar to those seen in the late nineteenth centur

As ' countries of origin have shifted from Europe to Asia and the Americas, a narrative has developed that contemporary immigrants do not assimilate as thoroughly as older immigrants. But is this true?

In a Perspective, Ran Abramitzky and Leah Boustan summarize their long-running research program matching individuals across historical US Censuses. The authors compare intergeneration trends across two periods: the late 19th to early 20th century, and 1980 to the present. The article was published in PNAS Nexus.

By following millions of immigrants into the second generation, the authors were able to empirically investigate whether rates of assimilation have changed over time. By and large, the authors found that the process and rate of assimilation has not changed since the nineteenth century. Immigrants still tend to work low-paying jobs throughout their lives but live to see their children enter the .

Now, as before, rates of incarceration are lower among immigrants than among the US-born population. Attitudes toward immigration today are more positive than ever before in US history, but significantly more polarized by . According to the authors, creating  based on the belief that immigrants do not integrate would be a mistake.

More information: Abramitzky, R. et al. Immigrants and their children assimilate into US society and the US economy, both in the past and today, PNAS Nexus (2024). DOI: 10.1093/pnasnexus/pgae344academic.oup.com/pnasnexus/art … 3/10/pgae344/7795945

Union dismayed by one day’s notice of Dyson’s surprise layoff in Singapore

The United Workers of Electronics and Electrical Industries 
was disappointed it was given only a day’s notice of the layoff.
 ST PHOTO: MARK CHEONG


Tay Hong Yi
Updated
Oct 01, 2024

SINGAPORE – Consumer electronics manufacturer Dyson laid off an undisclosed number of workers in Singapore in a surprise move on Oct 1, blindsiding a union it had signed a collective agreement with.

The United Workers of Electronics and Electrical Industries (UWEEI) said in a statement signed by its executive secretary Patrick Tay and released late on Oct 1 that it was disappointed the union was given only one day’s notice of the exercise by the company. This leaves insufficient time for meaningful discussion between the parties involved, the union said.

“Unionised companies should work with their unions in a timely manner to ensure that a fair and equitable process is carried out to safeguard the interests of all workers, especially our Singaporean core,” UWEEI said.


It has escalated the matter to the Ministry of Manpower.

However, it added: “The union understands that the affected workers fall outside its scope of representation under the collective agreement with Dyson.

“Nonetheless, UWEEI stands ready to support affected workers.”


Responding to queries, a Dyson spokesperson said: “We constantly evolve the composition of our teams and take steps to ensure we have the right skills in the right places.

“Our ambitions in Singapore remain unchanged, and we anticipate that we will continue to grow here in the medium term.”

The spokesperson declined to comment on the number of workers and types of roles affected, as well as the severance package offered.

However, The Straits Times understands the quantum of the retrenchment package is in line with prevailing norms in Singapore, and also includes counselling and job-matching services.

According to the Manpower Ministry’s website, the prevailing norm is a retrenchment benefit of between two weeks to one month’s salary per year of service, depending on the company’s financial position and the industry.

In unionised companies where the amount of retrenchment benefit is stated in the collective agreement, the norm is one month’s salary for each year of service.

The company employed over 1,920 staff here as at the end of 2023, after an expansion of head count by 35 per cent that year.

An Economic Development Board (EDB) spokesperson said Dyson maintains a significant presence in Singapore through its headquarters as well as innovation and advanced manufacturing activities.

“As Dyson reviews the composition of its teams to ensure it continues building up expertise in areas relevant to its business needs, EDB will work closely with the company and relevant government agencies to assist affected employees.

“This includes facilitating job placements with companies that require their skillsets and capabilities.”

More On This Topic

Up to $6,000 in financial support over maximum of 6 months for those who lose jobs

The retrenchment exercise was done very discreetly, with those impacted receiving e-mail notifying them of a one-on-one meeting, an affected employee told news outlet CNA. Those laid off were from the manufacturing and procurement departments.

The retrenchments come after Singapore-headquartered Dyson announced on July 9 that it would lay off about 1,000 of its 3,500 staff in Britain as part of a global restructuring.

When asked about the fate of its almost 2,000 staff in Singapore, the multi-national company said then that there would be no direct impact here.

UWEEI said it will work together with the National Trades Union Congress’ Employment and Employability Institute to help match affected workers to employment opportunities.

It will also support them with career coaching and job training, where needed.

UWEEI also said its members may tap the Union Training Assistance Programme fund to offset training courses, should they require skills upgrading.

“UWEEI will also assist members who may face financial hardship via their various assistance programmes.”

The union called for companies to observe guiding principles outlined in NTUC’s Fair Retrenchment Framework and the Tripartite Advisory on Managing Excess Manpower and Responsible Retrenchment.

It encouraged impacted workers and union members to reach out to for assistance at 6440 2338 during working hours or via e-mail at UWEEI@ntuc.org.sg

 

The Left and the Israeli/Palestine Wars


AN ANARCHIST/SYNDICALIST VIEW



Review of Michael Fischbach, The Movement and the Middle East; How the Arab-Israeli Conflict Divided the American Left

by Wayne Price

A major issue motivating the U.S. left at this time is the Israeli/Palestine war, specifically Israel’s genocidal attack on Gaza. Even the environmental-climate justice movement has been eclipsed for the time. There are other disasters in the world, such as in Sudan or Haiti, but the U.S.—our government—is not directly and immediately supporting the aggressors in those cases, financially, politically, and militarily. It is in Gaza.

It may be useful to compare the present-day conflict with the last period of U.S. radicalization and upheaval—the “sixties” (from the mid-fifties to the mid-seventies). The major issues of that period were Civil Rights/Black liberation and the U.S.-Vietnamese War. These two issues shook the country! There were also other concerns at this time and after, such as the women’s liberation movement, LGBTQ liberation, anti-nuclear power, some labor struggles, etc.

Michael Fischbach is focused on the conflict in that period between Israel and the Palestinian people and the Arabs in general. (There were two significant wars between Israel and Arabs in this period, in 1967 and 1973.) This was never the major issue on the left. But Fischbach maintains that it was a source of constant tension in the left movement, and was at least one of the reasons the movement eventually divided and petered out. It was “a major problem that bedeviled and ultimately weakened the American Left in the 1960s and1970s…which side, Israel or the Palestinians, deserved the support of left wing activists?” (Fischbach 2020; p.3)

Then, as now, a large proportion of the white left was composed of Jews. Just how large is never estimated, although one source is quoted as guessing 30% (1 to 2% of the U.S. is Jewish). To many Jews support for Israel was a part of their self-identity. An attack on Israel felt like an attack on their very selves. They had grown up thinking of Israel as a democratic and even socialist country. Other Jews, radicalized by the Vietnam-U.S. war, felt that Israel was part of the imperialist system. If anything, they felt that Jewish values required support for the underdog and oppressed. “The entire Left would feel the impact of this Jewish ‘civil war’.” (p. 6)

Fischbach’s book is extremely thorough and a bit academic; he rarely expresses his own political views. It is worth reading through to get a complete view of this issue in this period, which prepared the current period. (He briefly quotes two comments by me from an interview.)

Using Fischbach’s data, I would summarize left approaches to the sixties Mid-East conflict mainly into four types:

First, there was a strong tradition of left support for Israel. This was after World War II, when the left had joined in the fight against the anti-semitic Nazis, and after the extent of the Holocaust had been discovered. Israel had been founded, no longer a Zionist dream, and had to be related to, one way or another.

Stalin’s Russia had supported Israel’s establishment and sent arms through Czechoslovakia. This meant that Communist Parties everywhere—including the U.S.—had supported Israel (until the Soviet Union switched to the Arabs). This left a pro-Israel tradition among some Communists.

Finally, Israel had largely been founded by social democrats and even libertarian socialists. They set up an economy dominated by a Jewish union federation as well as building the famous democratic-communist kibbutzim (both being mostly closed to Palestinians). This was before today’s rightist-religious Zionists replaced the social democrats in the government.

In U.S. politics, the corporate rich and the political establishment are pro-Israel because it serves the interests of U.S. imperialism in the region. And there is a layer of wealthy Jews who also identify with Israel out of religious belief and personal loyalty. Among masses of Jewish people there is a belief that support for Israel is a part of their religion or at least their identity. They ignore that almost all religious Jewish trends had rejected Zionism before the Second World War. (So did almost all varieties of Jewish socialists.) Nor do they intend to settle in Israel, which was a central tenet of original Zionism. They insist that to be against Zionism, or even critical of Israel, is to be a Jew-hater. These pro-Israeli views put pressure on leftist Jews to not break with their families, communities, and identities.

Second, the anti-war movement and the Black liberation movement radicalized a great many young people. They came to reject liberalism and reformism. (Most of the Vietnam war was fought by more-or-less liberal Democratic presidents, while support for Civil Rights was at best wishy-washy by those Democratic administrations.) They came to see that the underlying enemy was capitalism, which, on a world scale, was imperialism. They identified with the oppressed peoples, the “wretched of the earth,” against the great powers, especially the U.S. government. Tens of thousands or more young adults, on campus and off, regarded themselves as “revolutionaries.” This frightened the masters of the status quo.

The far-left (to the left of the liberals and “democratic socialists”) was composed of Communists and various sorts of Maoists, Trotskyists, radical pacifists, and independent radicals. Unfortunately (in my opinion) there were few libertarian (autonomous) Marxists or revolutionary anarchists; most anarchists were among the pacifists. Yet these small numbers of extreme leftists had an influence far beyond their size. The passivity of the liberal Democrats and of the union leaders left the field open for more radical forces to play an outside—and essential—role in the anti-war movement in particular.

To many, it seemed obvious that the guerrilla war being waged by the Palestinians against the settler-colonialist state of Israel (which was backed by the U.S.) was another part of the world-wide revolutionary war against imperialism. It was another part of the struggle being waged in Vietnam and in the African-American communities of North America.

The radicals were right to become revolutionary. Unfortunately, their conception of revolution was learned from Ho Chi Minh, Mao Tse Tung, and Fidel Castro. Also from the various Marxist-Leninist and nationalist groupings in the Middle East. What these various approaches to revolution had in common was their authoritarianism. Their goal was to overthrow the existing states and replace them with new ones—one-party dictatorships. None promoted democratic pluralism, decentralist federalism, or workers’ self-management.

Their idea of “socialism” (let alone “communism”) was a completely state-owned and managed economy. This is state-capitalism, and it always turned out to be inefficient, so they expanded market-based methods. They had no concept of worker-managed industries and cooperatives. Similarly, in the U.S. they had little conception of the anti-war movement reaching out to the working class majority, which came to dislike the war but remained alienated from the movement. (Fischbach does not make this criticism.)

Third, there were those then, as there are now, whose focus was getting the two peoples to live together. The Israeli Jews came to Palestine escaping the Holocaust and its aftermath. Whatever the goals of the Zionist leaders, these Jews were now there in Palestine, having become a Hebrew-speaking Israeli Jewish nation. Whatever Muslim fanatics might dream, the Israeli Jews are not leaving Palestine. And whatever Zionists may dream, the Palestinians are also not leaving. After 75 years of Zionist expansion, the Palestinians are still there. So the conclusion is the need for both people to agree to live together in whatever political system they can work out.

On its face this seems reasonable. It is also consistent with the socialist goal of Jewish and Arab workers uniting in self-interest and solidarity across national borders.

The problem is that the original settlement of the Jews, driving out the indigenous Palestinians, is not something in the distant past. It was still going on in the sixties and is still going on today. Right now the Israeli state is refusing to let Palestinian refugees return to their homes from before the war of 1948. Right now the Jewish settlers in the West Bank, with the military backing of the government, are driving Palestinians from their villages, orchards, and farms. And of course, right now the Israeli state is waging a war of extermination against the Palestinians of Gaza.

Palestinians, in their weakness and desperation, have also done things like terrorist bombings of civilians. But it is the Israeli Jews who are the settlers and occupiers; theirs is the guilt for the violence. They have pushed the oppressed to the wall.

Therefore the conflict cannot be treated as between two equal indigenous people. The Israeli Jews must be willing to give up their Zionism, their Jewish-supremacy in a “Jewish state,” in order to live together with the Palestinians. While some Palestinians are committed to a religious, all-Muslim, state in Palestine, most of the people have proven willing to live peacefully with the Jews, if given the chance. So far, they have not been given that chance.

Four, many of the movement’s leaders of the sixties were on the side of the Palestinians. They still did not want to raise that cause in the anti-war demonstrations. It was difficult at best to hold a broad coalition together merely to hold big demonstrations against the Vietnam war. Coalitions were rent by fights over whether to call for Negotiations, or for Immediate Withdrawal (“Out Now!”). Should they focus on building peaceful and legal mass marches? Or on nonviolent civil disobedience? Or on violent clashes with the police? Should Democratic politicians be invited to address the rallies? Or should they be banned? Should the struggle agains racism be a central part of demonstrations?

Anti-war coalitions were formed and broke up. Near the end there were two main groupings which regularly negotiated joint demonstrations. In this context, leaders (who themselves were pro-Palestinian) did not want another issue which might blow up their coalitions. The leaders of one major coalition, the then-Trotskyist Socialist Workers Party, solved the problem by advocating “single issue” demonstrations. That is, the only issue was opposition to the war, and nothing else, not even anti-racism let alone Palestine. The other coalitions tended to just downplay the Palestinian cause.

Even Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., kept quiet about the Mid-East conflicts. He was personally sympathetic to the Palestinians, but he had lost many allies, white and Black, when he came out against the Vietnam-U.S. war. He did not wish to antagonize any more “friends.”

After the Sixties Movement

The “movement” dissolved in the late 1970s, even as other issues continued. These included the women’s movement, which if anything expanded, the anti-nuclear movement and the beginnings of the environmental struggle, the Nuclear Freeze, and efforts against other imperial wars in Central America and elsewhere.

But the main changes were the end of legal segregation in the South and the crushing of Black radicalism in the North by the police. Meanwhile the last U.S. troops left Vietnam in 1973. The leadership of the Black movement and much of the anti-war movement was channelled into the Democratic Party, there to be smothered and absorbed.

As Fischbach explains, with the decline of the anti-Vietnam war movement there was no longer a need to hold back criticism of Israel. This was one thing which permitted an increase in pro-Palestinian activity.

“Seeking Arab-Israeli peace, calling for a Palestinian state, and even holding Israel and the United States accountable for the lion’s share of the problems facing a peaceful resolution of the conflict were becoming mainstream ideas by the mid 1970s….” (p. 176) At least they were becoming mainstream in the broad left and peace movements. This became even more so after the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 1983.

But everyone did not feel that way. At a 1985 World Conference on Women in Nairobi, Betty Friedan told an Egyptian feminist, “Please do not bring up Palestine…this is a women’s conference, not a political conference.” (p. 198)

Writing in 2020, Fischbach concluded, “The more open way in which pro-Palestinian viewpoints can be discussed publicly today is a direct result of what transpired in the 1960s and 1970s. Support for the Palestinians has moved into the liberal-left mainstream.” He refers to the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement. “Advocacy of Palestinian rights has become a permanent part of the progressive American political landscape.” (p. 203)

However, “On the other hand, pro-Israeli forces have symbiotically become more organized and more powerful over the decades in their attempts to combat pro-Palestinian perspectives at colleges and universities.” (p. 203)

This is where matters stood when the Palestinian forces of Hamas and others crossed into Israel on Oct 7, 2023—followed by Israel’s massive assault on Gaza.

There was a major pro-Palestinian reaction among the youth on university campuses. They correctly put the attack by Hamas in the context of Israel’s violent occupation of Palestine and its displacement of the indigenous Arabs. Their solidarity with the oppressed Palestinians was noble and generous.

In the words of Judith Butler, “To be in solidarity with Palestine is not necessarily to agree with all the military actions of Hamas, but it is to stand with the people who are being targeted in a genocidal manner.” (Goodman 2023)

The protests do not identify with Hamas or other reactionary forces. Primarily they are supporting the Palestinians against the Zionist assault, and calling for an “immediate, permanent, ceasefire.” But the authoritarian tradition of the revolutionary left has left an unfortunate effect in not explicitly declaring for a radically-democratic, cooperative, pluralistic, society in Palestine—not Hamas’ goal. This would not counter the principle of national self-determination: it is up to the Palestinians to decide what sort of political, economic, and social arrangement they want. But that does not limit what U.S. protesters may say.

The Palestinian forces were justified in smashing through the militarized border and in attacking Israeli military camps and targets—even in taking over kibbutzim. Any oppressed nation would be justified in taking such actions. But the killing and kidnapping of unarmed and nonresistant civilians (even children) were atrocities and war crimes, which should be condemned. Excusing or even ignoring such actions is what led to support for Stalinism in past movements.

The right-wing attack on the pro-Palestinian demonstrations has been massive and vicious. Reactionary Republicans who cooperate with U.S. Nazis and white supremacists suddenly appeared as champions of the Jews. Jewish donors to universities denounced free speech when used by pro-Palestinians. Learned rabbis declared that without Israel there is no Judaism. Liberal university administrators wilted under the pressure. Showing utter spinelessness, they have denied free speech to the most nonviolent of protests, denied graduation to demonstrators, and called in the cops.

There has been a rise in Jew-hatred in our country (as well as in Islamaphobia). Some is apolitical. Most is on the right. But there is some on the left, which must be condemned. But the claim of the Zionists that anti-Zionism (or even criticism of Israel) is in itself anti-semitism, is a lie. One of the best refutations of this lie has been the relatively large participation of Jews in the pro-Palestinian movement. Many declare that Jewish ethics require their standing with the oppressed and exploited. (As a humanist Jew myself, I am proud of these activists.)

As I write, the U.S. is some months away from a presidential election.The election is remarkably irrelevant to the Gazan war. Democrats Joseph Biden and Kamala Harris backed Israel from the beginning and are still pouring military and financial aid into that state. They say they would prefer for the Israeli state to modulate its aggression, and even call for a ceasefire. But they do not put full U.S. leverage behind this preference. In this area as in every one, the Republican Donald Trump is no better and possibly worse. He is also committed to support of Israel as well as the Arab dictatorships.

The present crisis in the Mid-East and in the U.S. left is a continuation of the crisis of the sixties, which is well explained by Michael Fischbach. Some temporary agreement may be cobbled together to pause the killing and give some benefits to the Palestinians. That might be better than the war. But there will be no end to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict so long as capitalism and its states continue to dominate the Mid-East and the world.

References

Fischbach, Michael R. (2020). The Movement and the Middle East; How the Arab-Israeli Conflict Divided the American Left.
Stanford CA: Stanford University Press.

Goodman, Amy (8/26/2023). “Judith Butler on Hamas, Israel’s Collective Punishment of Gaza & Why Biden Must Push for Ceasefire.” Democracy Now! https://www.democracynow.org/2023/10/26/judith_butler_on_hamas_israels_c...

*written for Anarcho-Syndicalist Review

Otto Gross: Psychoanalytic Anarchy, Erased Genius

From Distinctively Dionysian

This Introduction to Otto Gross is a companion zine to the “Persona Non-Grata” and “Resurrecting Legacy” columns in Distinctively Dionysian. In this issue, we uncover Gross’s intellectual legacy and explore the tragedy of his erasure from history.

L’oubli délibéré—the deliberate forgetting of Otto Gross—is an intellectual injustice that demands rectification. Like Max Stirner, Gross’s radical ideas were buried by the powers that be, deemed too dangerous or too truthful. Pathologized and labeled mentally unstable, Otto Gross was very purposely cast aside, his contributions to psychoanalysis and anarchism erased and largely forgotten.

Stirner’s direct influence on Gross has been neglected by academia and researchers alike. This zine series compiles over ten years of Otto Gross scholarship, presented in six volumes—a vital addition to the Distinctively Dionysian columns on Gross. This first zine sets the stage for deeper explorations of his work, his anarchistic rebellion, and the impact Max Stirner had on Otto Gross.

To obtain a copy, send $8 to:
Distinctively Dionysian
PO BOX 1332, Astoria, Oregon, USA, 97103.