Feed items

USA : Gov. Martin O'Malley discloses that he is a member of a labor union

Source: Maryland Reporter

ICTSI has contractual obligation to hire longshoremen at Portland’s Terminal 6 at the Port of Portland

ILWU Coast Longshore Division news release:
PORTLAND, OR, June 8, 2012 – On Monday, June 4, a neutral arbitrator ruled in favor of the ILWU longshoremen who claim that maintaining refrigerated shipping containers on Terminal 6 at the Port of Portland is their work under a longstanding collective bargaining agreement that covers all West Coast ports.
In 2010, the Port of Portland privatized Terminal 6, and in so doing, relinquished operational control of the facility to a Philippines-based company called International Container Terminal Services, Inc., or ICTSI. ICTSI is a member of the Pacific Maritime Association, which represents shippers, terminal operators, and stevedores, and negotiates a collective bargaining agreement with the International Longshore and Warehouse Union called the Pacific Coast Longshore and Clerks’ Agreement, or PCL&CA. In order to become a PMA member, ICTSI provided written assurances that the company was not bound by any other labor agreements and that it would abide by the requirements of membership.
The Port of Portland concedes that it is not a party to the relationship between the ILWU and PMA member company ICTSI....

Port of Portland intervenes in T6 labor dispute

Port of Portland Terminal 6The Port of Portland on Friday said it filed a complaint with federal labor authorities over a union dispute that it says has put its key Terminal 6 container terminal in a near-shutdown situation.
The port filed an unfair labor practice charge with the National Labor Relations Board National Labor Relations Board saying an action by the International Longshore and Warehouse Union, Local 8, has “significantly impacted container operations at Terminal 6 causing costly delays for area shippers and truckers.”
A 25-year lease of T6 issued by the port in 2010 to Philippines-based terminal operator ICTSI included language indicating that the work would stay with the IBEW.
But the ILWU contends that once the port was privatized to ICTSI, the T6 fell within an existing collective-bargaining pact with the Pacific Maritime Association, a trade group that represents shippers and terminal operators including ICTSI. As a member of the Pacific Maritime Association, the ILWU says ICTSI isn’t bound by any other labor agreements.
“Two years ago, the Port of Portland entered into an agreement with Philippines-based ICTSI in which the port...

U.S. Hasn’t Decided on Expanding Pacific Talks, Obama Aide Says

The Obama administration hasn’t made a decision about adding Japan, Mexico and Canada to a Pacific-region trade accord being negotiated by nine nations, a top economic adviser to President Barack Obama said.
The Pacific agreement, a trade priority for Obama, includes Australia, Brunei, Chile, Malaysia, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, the U.S. and Vietnam. Japan, Mexico, and Canada have expressed interest in joining, and individual governments are bilateral talks with the three nations.
Talks on the nine-nation deal will resume in San Diego starting July 2.
More at Bloomberg

Proposed Columbia River Crossing bridge is too low for some marine cargo

The current I-5 bridge offers 178 feet of vertical clearance when the lift span is raised. That puts the existing bridges in the same league with the Astoria-Megler Bridge (193 feet,) the Longview, Wash. span (187 feet,) and the Glenn Jackson I-205 bridge (144 feet.) The proposed Columbia River Crossing, designed to replace the I-5 bridge shown above, has clearance of between 78 and 95 feet, depending on water level.
The Columbia River Crossing planners ignored river users’ input and opted for 95 feet [of vertical clearance]. The fateful blunder has put the project at odds with a handful of marine shippers, the U.S. Coast Guard and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, both of which need to sign off on the project.
The impasse may force the CRC to jettison the $3.1 billion current plan — seven years in the making — and design a higher bridge at a cost of $100 million-plus.
How did the CRC get to this place? How did an organization with tens of millions of dollars to spend and years of time, whose mission in part is to facilitate marine cargo flows, mess up something so basic as an acceptable bridge height?
More in the Oregonian

USA : New Jobless Data Hints At Short Hiring Slump

Source: NYTimes

USA : New York building trades donations to business group show deep fractures in labor movement

Source: New York Times

USA : Arbitrator rules to reinstate Omaha police officer

Source: Omaha World Herald

Canada : Solidarity with locked out Quebec steelworkers; U.S. workers mining metal for Olympic medals also want Rio Tinto 'Off the Podium'