ILWU locked out at West Coast ports

Compiled by Sean Marquis

Oct. 2 (AGR)— West Coast ports remain shut, throwing trains, cargo ships and billions of dollars worth of commerce into limbo while the International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILWU) and the Pacific Maritime Association (PMA) remained deadlocked in negotiations.

The impasse has created headaches for Western shippers, backing up trains to St. Paul, MN, stalling ships in Puget Sound and idling over 10,000 dockworkers.

The PMA has locked-out the dockworkers and pledged to not reopen terminals until the union at least agrees to a contract extension - union workers have already been working under a contract that expired Sept. 1.

The only movement in the impasse may have come when James Spinosa, president of the ILWU, said for the first time he might be willing to accept federal mediation.

A resolution could be months away.

“If it goes on for even a short period of time, it’s a problem for the economy,” White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said. “We’re monitoring it closely.”

President George W. Bush could intervene to force a return to work, but such an order could be politically difficult before the Nov. 5 elections as Republicans are trying to woo the labor vote in several key states.

The union has accused the Bush administration of meddling in talks, which began in May and showed some signs of progress before deteriorating in the late summer. Talks finally crumbled last week over the question of how to implement new technology on the waterfront.

Longshoremen said they can accept short-term job losses from increased efficiency, but the union wanted guarantees that positions created by computer tracking systems would be union-covered. The PMA has refused to give such a guarantee.

Shippers, represented by the PMA, allege that ILWU workers engaged in a work slowdown that reduced productivity by 54 percent.

A temporary Friday-Sunday lockout was extended on Monday and the PMA stated that the terminals would reopen only when the union signed an extension of the current contract or a new contract.

“I have said before, and I will say again: I will not pay workers to strike,” said Joseph Miniace, president and CEO of the San Francisco-based PMA. “I will only pay them to work.”

Spinosa said ILWU members had been asked to strictly follow safety rules because of the deaths of five workers in the past seven months.

But the San Francisco union chapter, historically one of the most militant on the coast, told workers who normally report to the same shipping terminal each day to instead begin Sunday at the dispatch hall for random assignment. Experienced crane operators, for example, chose other jobs and left their less experienced co-workers to operate the cranes, according to Richard Mead, local union president.

At the terminal run by Maersk, no operators took jobs on three cranes to load the last few containers on a ship that was otherwise ready to steam out.

“They wanted us to come back [after a two day lockout] like we were going to be good little puppy dogs,” Mead said. “It doesn’t work like that on the waterfront.”

The West coast ports process some $300 billion in cargo annually — a figure equivalent to 7 percent of the US gross domestic product. The shippers said each day of disruption could cost the US economy $1 billion.

Sources: Associated Press, San Francisco Chronicle, Seattle Post-Intelligencer, Washington Post

Illinois justice groups protest Wal-Mart discriminatory practices

By Ruth Wyman

Champaign, Illinois, Sept. 22— On the morning of Saturday, Sept. 21, members of the Champaign County chapter of NOW, along with several other local justice groups, held a protest in front of the Champaign Wal-Mart off North Prospect Avenue.

The National Organization for Women (NOW) has received numerous complaints regarding workplace environment and employment practices at Wal-Mart stores, distribution centers, and regional and corporate offices. They reviewed the extensive public record on cases filed against Wal-Mart and found the allegations disturbing.

The record against Wal-Mart includes allegations of sex discrimination in pay, promotion, and compensation, wage abuse, exclusion of contraceptive coverage in insurance plans, violations of child labor laws and the Americans with Disabilities Act, and discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. Cases have also been filed regarding firing pro-union workers, eliminating jobs once workers joined unions, and discouraging workers from unionizing. In addition, Wal-Mart contracts with companies in El Salvador that force workers to labor under sweatshop conditions, and continues to refuse to dispense Preven, the “morning-after pill.”

National NOW contacted Wal-Mart in March 2002 regarding these concerns, but has not received any response. Locally, the Inter-faith Committee for Worker Justice contacted Champaign Wal-Mart regarding these same concerns but never received a response.

Consistent with the goals of NOW’s Women Friendly Workplace Campaign, NOW has named Wal-Mart a “Merchant of Shame” and asked local NOW chapters to put pressure on Wal-Mart to change its discriminatory practices. Taking up the challenge, Ruth Wyman, President of Champaign County NOW has helped organize this local action.

“The women and men who work for Wal-Mart deserve an employer that respects their rights. Consumers across the country need to be able to spend their dollars with a clear conscience. Wal-Mart doesn’t afford us this option,” commented Wyman.

After the picket, the group delivered a letter and a “Women-Friendly Workplace Campaign Employer’s Pledge,” requesting that the manager forward it on to corporate headquarters with a request for Wal-Mart to sign the pledge for a women-friendly and worker-friendly workplace.”

This country’s top employers, including Wal-Mart, need to get the picture that women-friendly workplaces aren’t just good businesses, they’re good for business. With all the lip-service they give to being the friendly store, it’s a shame that philosophy doesn’t trickle down to Wal-Mart employees,” Wyman added.

Members of several local justice groups will join NOW in its campaign to demand changes in Wal-Mart’s unfair practices.

Source: Urbana-Champaign Independent Media Center

Trailblazers pay ‘in blood’ for legal action on rights

By Sherrill Nixon

Sydney, Australia, Sept. 30— Employers must be flexible enough to accommodate their workers’ family responsibilities or risk legal action, lawyers are warning after women successfully took their bosses to court.

The law protecting working women’s rights has become considerably clearer over the past year following a series of legal victories by trailblazers who took on their companies.

Maternity leave entitlements and work arrangements while children are young were the hot issues for the women, some of whom are still fighting in court after appeals by their employers.

Sandra Escobar extended her six-month maternity leave by two months in mid-2000 because she was having trouble weaning her daughter, Daneesha. But when she turned up for work, her full-time position as a payroll and accounts clerk with a Sydney firm, Rainbow Printing, had been filled, and her boss rejected her suggestion that she work part-time. Escobar felt she had no choice but to take her employer to court.

In July a federal magistrate, Rolf Driver, found Escobar had suffered discrimination on the grounds of family responsibilities.

Sian Ryan, of Turner Freeman Solicitors, who specializes in employment and discrimination law, says the decisions are a warning to employers that they must seriously consider reasonable requests for flexible work arrangements.

But Moira Rayner, acting Western Australian Equal Opportunity Commissioner, warns that legal advances are “written in the blood of the women” who run the cases.

Employers often have the resources to lodge appeal after appeal, causing long-term strain on the women’s personal and professional lives.

“Unless you have got a lot of money, you can’t run these cases,” Rayner said. “A lot of money and a terrific amount of determination.”

Escobar says the stress of legal action contributed to her marriage breakdown, and she cried in the witness stand under cross-examination.

“You think you can be strong about it, but you still break,” said Escobar, whose case was run through the Kingsford Legal Center. “But as much as it’s a headache for you, it’s a headache for them [employers] and they learn not to do it again.

“I do think employers should at least discuss it [work options] rather than just say no. They have to learn to be a bit open-minded.”

Source: Sydney Morning Herald