Longshoremen of the ILWU must be among the most class conscious part of the proletariat in the USA. Knowing which side you are on helps you organize, make your union stronger, and gain higher wages and better working conditions than otherwise; having leaders -- like Harry Bridges (1901-1990) -- who know which side they are on also helps.
Relatively high wages and good working conditions of today's longshoremen in the ILWU are results of past collective bargainings, through which the union tried to ensure that fruits of labor-saving technological innovations would be shared with workers, rather than simply pocketed by capitalists at the expense of workers:
***** ...Meanwhile, the union concluded that new methods and machines would be introduced no matter how great members' resistance to change. As employers had the contractual right to make changes in operations, the best the union could hope for was to retain the old rules governing size of gangs, methods of cargo handling and related contract guarantees, as long as possible. New ideas for cargo handling, revolutionary ship design, the introduction of strapped loads, large-scale use of containers, and numerous other devices would sooner or later bypass the existing rules. Proposed legislation would also outlaw may of the guarantees and safeguards afforded by the old contract, leaving the workers with no new forms of security or protection in exchange.
Clearly the time had come to reexamine labor relations in the light of the mechanization and modernization of West Coast longshoring. The union and the employers decided they were better off tackling the issues as a whole, and agreed the following principles would shape the 1960 contract: the shipowners and stevedoring contractors were freed from restrictions on the introduction of labor-saving devices, relieved of the use of unnecessary workers, and assured of the elimination of work practices which impeded the efficient flow of cargo.
The union made these guarantees to industry in exchange for an unprecedented series of benefits for the workers, designed to protect them against the negative impact of machines on their daily work and job security. The agreement provided that:
1. The current workforce would not be laid off. If the unhindered introduction of new machinery and methods of work resulted in the loss of work opportunity so that the work force had to be reduced, it would shrink from the top, with an innovative voluntary early retirement program instead of layoffs. If employers later needed to cut the workforce further, they could invoke a compulsory retirement provision with a higher pension benefit. 2. Increased profits would be shared with the workers in the form of increased wages and benefits. 3. Machines and labor-saving devices would be introduced wherever possible to lighten the burden of hard and hazardous work.
During longshore bargaining in 1966, the principle of M&M were extended under union pressure to "preserve the present registered force of longshoremen as the basic work force in the industry, and to share with that work force a portion of the net labor cost savings to be effected by the introduction of mechanical innovations, removal of contractual restrictions, or any other means." Significantly, these innovations were to [be] implemented without causing a speedup for the individual worker, indiscriminate layoffs, or a violation of safety codes or rules....
<http://home.earthlink.net/~chwbiii/newunion.htm> *****
Relatively high wages and good working conditions, however, don't make capitalists out of longshoremen: "Over the years, various shipping innovations have reduced the number of West Coast dockworkers to about 10,000 permanent longshoremen and 5,000 part-time workers. Those relatively low numbers mean that shipping companies do not object to the six-figure wages. Longshoremen's pay adds up to slightly more than 1 percent of the cargo value they handle -- costs that are 'negligible,' a top PMA official said" (at <http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A64399-2002Jan4.html>). They still produce profits for shipping companies, which admit that labor costs are "negligible."
Still the same struggle over labor-saving technology, productivity, and relative surplus value as Marx described:
***** The capitalist...cries out against this usurping attempt to lay taxes on the advance of industry, and declares roundly that the productiveness of labour does not concern the labourer at all. [20]
[20] "Trades' Unions, in their desire to maintain wages, endeavor to share in the benefits of improved machinery." (Quelle horreur!) "...the demanding higher wages, because labour is abbreviated, is in other words the endeavor to establish a duty on mechanical improvements." ("On Combination of Trades," new ed., London, 1834, p. 42.)
<http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/ch21.htm> ***** -- Yoshie
* Calendar of Events in Columbus: <http://www.osu.edu/students/sif/calendar.html> * Anti-War Activist Resources: <http://www.osu.edu/students/sif/activist.html> * Student International Forum: <http://www.osu.edu/students/sif/> * Committee for Justice in Palestine: <http://www.osu.edu/students/CJP/>