[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 145 (1999), Part 14]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages 20707-20708]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



                       WEST COAST LABOR AGREEMENT

                                 ______
                                 

                          HON. NORMAN D. DICKS

                             of washington

                    in the house of representatives

                        Thursday, August 5, 1999

  Mr. DICKS. Mr. Speaker, I want to bring to the attention of my 
colleagues a highly significant but largely unnoticed development--the 
recently agreed-upon labor pact affecting West Coast dock workers and 
clerks. At 5 p.m. on July 1st, with a news blackout in effect, the West 
Coast longshore contract expired. From early May until mid-July, 
officials of the Pacific Maritime Association representing roughly 100 
companies on the West Coast, and representatives of the International 
Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILWU) met to try to hammer out a new 
agreement. After several days of complex, difficult negotiations--
frequently lasting through the night--the two sides reached agreement 
several days ago. Last week, more than 99 percent of the delegates to 
the ILWU caucus recommended approval of the new three-year pact. It is 
expected that before the end of August this agreement will be fully 
ratified and that West Coast ports will enjoy 3 years of stability.
  Besides raising wage and pension benefits the new agreement, among 
other things, calls for companies and union members to form a committee 
to discuss the introduction of new technology on the waterfront, or 
improve the use of current technology, to enhance productivity. This 
would seem to be crucial for all concerned. Canadian and Mexican ports 
and companies are rapidly moving forward trying to outcompete the 
United States for an increasing share of trade with Asia. It is in the 
interest of neither management nor labor to let this happen.
  In a recent article in the Los Angeles Times, Professor Stephen 
Cohen, Co-Director of the Berkeley Roundtable on International Economy, 
and John Wilson, the former Chief Economist at the Bank of America and 
now a Senior Fellow at the Roundtable, noted that in the pat twenty 
years waterborne trade through West Coast ports has grown from $61 
billion to an estimated $285 billion for this year. This is double the 
rate of increase in total US trade growth and this West Coast 
waterborne trade is clearly critical to America's continuing economic 
prosperity. Further, that trade, according to Cohen and Wilson, now 
constitutes more than 60 percent of the gross state product of my state 
of Washington and more than 35 percent of California's GSP.
  If PMA and the ILWU had not reached agreement and there had been a 
West Coast dock strike or lockout, the dislocations would have been 
felt even more strongly in Asia than here. As Cohen and Wilson have 
noted: Asian exports arriving by ship at West Coast ports are expected 
to exceed $200 billion this year. This is the principal source of the 
vital foreign exchange net earnings needed to sustain the currency 
values, to service large foreign debts and to import the components and 
machinery required for growth and development of the stricken Asian 
economies. A significant disruption of West Coast ports would hamper 
recovery. It might also affect financial markets.
  Mr. President, my constituents in Washington State and all Americans 
have a stake in this pact and in assuring that US-Asian trade continues 
to grow in coming years. None of us should lose sight of this reality. 
I am submitting for the Record a copy of the Cohen-Wilson article and a 
related article by Dan Weikel of The Los Angeles Times.

                [Los Angeles Times, Wed., July 14, 1999]

                METRO--Port Strike Would Hurt U.S., Asia

                (By Stephen S. Cohen and John O. Wilson)

       Despite six weeks of negotiations, the International 
     Longshore and Warehouse Union and the Pacific Maritime 
     Assoc., which represents almost 100 West Coast shipping 
     lines, have failed to reach an agreement for a new contract 
     for the West Coast. Since the prior contract expired on July 
     1, many union work actions have affected port operations up 
     and down the coast. A full-fledged strike would put the U.S. 
     and many other economies at great risk.
       In the last few weeks, crane drivers walked off the job for 
     two days in Oakland, effectively shutting down one of the 
     nation's busiest ports. Work slowdown also have impacted the 
     flow of goods through the behemoth ports of Los Angeles and 
     Long Beach. Ports in the Pacific Northwest are experiencing 
     slowdowns as well.
       A West Coast port shutdown could trigger a reaction in 
     international financial markets, with the biggest risk being 
     a worsening of the Asian financial and economic crisis. There 
     would also be a major national economic impact, a 20-day 
     strike at ports in

[[Page 20708]]

     California, Oregon and Washington, for example, could cost 
     this country close to $40 billion and 200,000 jobs. The 
     impact of such a shutdown would increase daily across the 
     country and even could trigger a sudden spike in American 
     consumer prices.
       What makes a West Coast dock shutdown a potential detonator 
     of a national and international financial and economic 
     crisis? The size and magnitude of the trade flowing through 
     the ports, the dependency of this North American gateway on 
     Asian economies and the relative inflexibility to divert 
     cargo to other ports.
       Since 1980, waterborne trade through West Coast ports has 
     increased from $61 billion to an estimated $285 billion this 
     year. That is double the rate of increase in total U.S. trade 
     growth.
       This growth in trade activity is directly related to the 
     increasing import-export activity with Asia. West Coast ports 
     are now dominated by trade with Asia, which accounts for 
     about three-quarters of all port activity (sea and air) in 
     California and about 60% in Washington state. 
     International trade accounts for about 19% of the U.S. 
     gross domestic product and more than one-third of 
     California's gross state product.
       But the real dependency is one the other side of the 
     Pacific. Asian exports arriving by ship at West Coast ports 
     are expected to exceed $200 billion this year. This is the 
     principal source of the vital foreign exchange net earnings 
     needed to sustain the currency values, to service large 
     foreign debts and to import the components and machinery 
     required for growth and development of the stricken Asian 
     economies. A significant disruption of West Coast ports would 
     hamper recovery. It might also affect financial markets.
       The ability to shift significant volumes of Asian trade to 
     East Coast or Gulf of Mexico ports in the event of a West 
     Count shutdown is now extremely limited because container 
     facilities--ships, ports and infrastructure--are too 
     specialized. The West Coast ports have made about 70% of all 
     port investment in the 48 contiguous states for the past five 
     years. As a result, high volume shipping is a powerful, 
     integrated and, alas, inflexible system. Almost all the 
     containers destined for the Central and Mountain states now 
     pass through West Coast ports. So do nearly half of 
     containers destined for the North Atlantic states.
       But because of the specialization, the U.S. does not have 
     the luxury of simply diverting Asian cargo to East Coast 
     ports. Shipping is no longer a collection of roving ships 
     docking here and there.
       For all these reasons, the risk of a port strike is simply 
     too great for the U.S. and world economies. The current act 
     of management-union negotiations warrants a watchful eye from 
     the White House and Treasury as well as the Department of 
     Labor. If need be, both sides should be locked up at Camp 
     David to finish the talks. But, in no case, should the ports 
     be allowed to shut down.
       Beach. ``There have been long truck lines, and we've been 
     getting calls from worried manufactures. We should be able to 
     clear, things up pretty quickly.''
       Both sides declined to discuss what agreements, if any, 
     were reached on several important contract issues; increasing 
     the productivity of longshore workers, the number and type of 
     jobs under union control, and the use of new labor-saving 
     technology on the docks.
       Negotiators said the terms of the contract will not be 
     released until after the agreement is ratified in the weeks 
     ahead by union members and the executive board of the 
     maritime association.