Rail-mounted gantry cranes at center of port labor talks impasse

Rail-mountedc gantry cranes at the Port of Virginia. [Photo: Konecranes]

As we’ve noted before, not all is going smoothly in the negotiations between U.S. East and Gulf Coast port employers, represented by USMX, and the ILA union. Both sides are bargaining as ILA members work under a temporary extension of their current master contract until Jan. 16, 2025. The sticking point continues to be what the union calls “automation” and the employers call “port modernization.” At the center of the impasse, says ILA executive VP Dennis A. Daggett, is the employers’ push to expand the use of semi-automated rail-mounted gantry cranes (RMGs).

Though ports such as the Port of Virginia have reported impressive throughput improvements with RMGs, a post by Daggett earlier this week spells out some of the ILA’s concerns— and some of the history,

“In the early 2000s, under a different ILA administration, the employers introduced semi-automated RMGs at a greenfield terminal on the East Coast,” writes Daggett. “They sold the ILA a vision that this new terminal would create thousands of jobs. It sounded like an opportunity, but hindsight reveals a much different picture. What seemed like a win for one port turned out to be the project that is becoming the model for automation that could potentially chip away at many jobs at almost every other terminal along the East and Gulf Coasts.

“At that time, the New Technology clause in our Master Contract required employers to file a letter of intent 120 days before implementing new equipment. However, after that notice was filed, employers essentially had free rein to unilaterally introduce whatever they wanted, without protecting the job functions or the roles of the workforce. It was a loophole that came at a cost to ILA members and their families.

“By the 2012-2013 Master Contract negotiations, we had learned from these mistakes. Under new leadership, the ILA secured workforce protections and guarantees, ensuring that automation would no longer be implemented without consideration of its impact on jobs. This progress continued in 2018, when we negotiated a prohibition on full automation. These agreements set clear limits on how far technology could go in replacing human labor.

“Today, employers are pushing to expand RMGs, claiming they are only ‘semi-automated’ and necessary for safety and productivity. But let’s break this down.

“The reality is that 95% of the work performed by RMGs is fully automated. From the moment a container is dropped off by a shuttle carrier, the RMG operates on its own lifting, stacking, and moving containers, including gantry and hoisting, without any human intervention. This includes the auto-stacking of containers in the container stack, which is also fully automated. Only in the last six feet of the container’s journey on the landside, when it is placed on a truck chassis, does an operator step in. But how long until employers automate those final six feet as well?

“This isn’t about safety or productivity—it’s about job elimination. The ILA has proven through data and real-world operations that RMGs are not more productive than traditional equipment operated by human workers. Faced with this evidence, employers have shifted their argument. Now, they claim that RMGs are needed to densify terminals and push out more volume, emphasizing their ability to stack nine containers across compared to six with traditional rubber-tired gantry cranes (RTGs). But this argument doesn’t hold up under scrutiny either. With all the advancements in technology, why can’t manufacturers design human-operated equipment capable of achieving the same density? This isn’t about meeting operational needs—it’s about replacing workers under the guise of progress while maximizing corporate profits at the expense of good-paying, family-sustaining U.S. jobs.”

Something else that Daggett mentions in his full post is the potential cyber risks associated with the software in port cranes.

MPA MAKES THE CASE FOR MODERNIZATION

Here’s what the MPA said in a statement released yesterday:

Modernization and investment in new technology are core priorities required to successfully bargain a new Master Contract with the ILA – they are essential to building a sustainable and greener future for the U.S maritime industry.

Port modernization is a necessity

Port operations must evolve, and embracing modern technology is critical to this evolution. It means improving performance to move more cargo more efficiently through existing facilities – advancements that are crucial for U.S. workers, consumers, and companies.

Due to the lack of available new land in most ports, the only way for U.S. East and Gulf Coast ports to handle more volume is to densify terminals – enabling the movement of more cargo through their existing footprints. It has been proven this can be accomplished while delivering benefits to both USMX members and to the ILA.

Evolution delivers more jobs and higher wages

USMX is not, nor has it ever been, seeking to eliminate jobs, but to simply implement and maintain the use of equipment and technology already allowed under the current contract agreements and already widely in use, including at some USMX ports.

A USMX terminal where modern crane technology was implemented more than a decade ago was previously limited to a 775,000-container capacity using traditional equipment. Yet, that same terminal nearly doubled its volume after incorporating the use of modern rail-mounted gantry cranes into its daily operations.

The added capacity delivered an equal increase in hours worked, leading to more union jobs, as the terminal went from employing approximately 600 workers a day to nearly 1,200. Moving more containers through the existing terminal footprints also means higher wages from the increased cargo, bringing in more money for volume/tonnage bonuses.

Partners in creating a sustainable roadmap for the future

Our priority has been, and continues to be, using technology to improve our efficiency, safety, capacity, and productivity. We cannot risk moving the industry backward with unworkable restrictions on the implementation of modern technology already in use – and permitted by the existing contract – which would serve only to decrease efficiencies at ports, reduce existing capacity, prevent increased cargo volumes and throughput, and block further growth in union jobs and wages. We need to ensure we are strengthening an increasingly complex supply chain and supporting port resilience to weather disruptions or surges in trade volumes, so that we are facilitating robust growth across the U.S. economy.

Strategic investment in new technology and modernized operations does not mean fewer jobs. Instead, it will create new opportunities for the ILA. We need a Master Contract that allows us to plan for the future and to ensure that the ILA are our partners in charting this path forward.