Global daily news 30.06.2014

***ITF aids TUCTA in improving dockers' security, welfare

Sharon James, ITF's Section Secretary, Dockers Section
The International Transport Federation (ITF) has cautioned ports authorities in the country over the increasing number of dockers and unqualified clearing and forwarding agents, saying that forgery and theft at port terminals are global challenges in the shipping sector but can be controlled by limiting the number of dockers.

Sharon James, ITF’s Section Secretary, Dockers Section, said ports are amongst sources of income which can set free African countries from poverty, their biggest enemy for decades.

During the ITF-Family on organizing methodology development for dockers in Africa seminar, held at mid week in Dar es Salaam, Sharon stated that port privatization is also a problem that hinders some African countries development and enrich private investors instead.

The seminar that was attended by six countries was intended to collect views from different stakeholders so that each country learns from the experience of others, hence facilitating adaptation in their respective nations, according to Sharon.

Helen Vapanouwe, Executive Secretary for Marketing and Strategic Business Development at Nam Port firm in Zambia commented that countries should solidify their naval units as a way forward against malpractices including ship collisions at various ports , also lamenting on the limited number of dockers with full employment in the various ports.

She also urged professional, competent staff member recruitment, initiating various training and development programmes including seafaring for prospective human resources, and ensuring a skilled workforce for the future in all ports in Africa.

For his side, the General Secretary of Trade Union Congress of Tanzania (TUCTA), Nicholaus Mgaya, commented that multinational companies operate global supply chains and often focus on profit-margins and increasing their share of the market to get the best results.

Some companies, he went on, are casualizing labour and allowing safety standards to fall while some global companies are opting to use ports where labour is cheaper and where they don’t have to recognize trade unions.

TUCTA therefore acknowledged ITF’s efforts in organizing to combat excesses of marginalization of workers in globalization and stop the exploitation of transport workers worldwide.

“It is therefore timely that ITF has come up with a new methodology which will assist the dockers in organizing for new members in line with Convention 87 on the freedom of association and right to form and join a trade union,” said Mgaya.

About 75 percent of the world cargo in international trade is conducted by ships, therefore it is an open secret that dockers handle 75 per cent of the world cargo in performing their duties.

The major pre-occupation of dockers’ unions, according to TUCTA, is fighting for acceptable labour and safety standards under ports or flags of convenience along with work programme through organizing to increase union strength in ports around the world.
SOURCE: THE GUARDIAN





FROM THE NATION (USA):


 

Michelle Chen
Exploring the world of work, from the border to the barricades.
Michelle Chen on June 27, 2014 - 9:38 AM ET


migrant workers from Myanmar
A Thai employer monitors migrant workers from Myanmar working on his fishing boat at a port in the town of Mahachai near Bangkok. (Reuters/Damir Sagolj)
The ocean’s culinary delights look pristine on our tables: peeled, processed and sterile. Now Western consumers are getting a taste of the human drudgery in the dregs of the supply chain.
News reports have surfaced of enslavement in the fisheries of Thailand. Men have reportedly been forced to work at boats for as many as twenty hours a day; disciplined with beatings, sometimes murders; often physically held captive on boats and at ports; and further preyed upon by usurious debts. The industry employs an estimated 650,000, with roughly 270,000 migrants on Thai fishing boats. Many have been trafficked from two poorer, less stable neighbors, Myanmar and Cambodia. Despite widespread reports of abuse and forced labor, regulatory bodies are weak and riddled with corruption, and we may never know how many have been subjected to this ferocious exploitation in order to keep our freezers stocked.
In a study by the UK-based Environmental Justice Foundation (EJF), which documented extraordinary brutality on the fishing vessels, a trafficking survivor described the mechanics of modern-day captivity at sea:
“We had no choice. There was nowhere to flee; we were surrounded by the sea. After we arrived back to the shore, we were locked inside the room guarded by their men; there were too many of them. So the workers had to take one trip after another, without having a choice.”
The processing of human beings begins on shore with debt bondage, as EJF explains, “Many migrant fishers are sold to boat owners for what is known as ka hua, the price paid which the worker must pay off before receiving any wages. This can leave many fishers working for months or even years without pay.”
Their status as a commodity in a complex global trade leaves them variously disenfranchised: they’re simultaneously trapped in primitive conditions, yet their labor is governed by a fast-moving, technology-driven market run by “first world” monopolies.
Thailand’s $7.3 billion fishing-export industry is major international market, yielding hundreds of thousands of tonnes of seafood each year. But it’s also rife with illegal and environmentally destructive fishing practices, which have severely depleted fish stocks and undermined the oceanic ecosystem as well as the fishing economy. The whole regional industry embodies the kind of neoliberal profiteering embedded in the global seafood industry (one study estimates that 20 to 32 percent of wild-caught seafood imports to the United States is illegally traded).

Migrant workers from Myanmar work on a fishing boat before sailing out of the port of Mahachai. (Reuters/Damir Sagolj)
A large portion of Thailand’s catch is considered “trash fish” which also enters the supply chain after being processed into fishmeal and then indirectly fed to other fish stocks. The Guardian recently traced this fishmeal to the prawns sold in “leading supermarkets around the world, including the top four global retailers: Walmart, Carrefour, Costco and Tesco.” The main purveyor of fishmeal from slave-staffed boats, Thailand-based Charoen Pokphand (CP) Foods, has also directly sourced ready-to-eat prawn to UK outlets.
Meanwhile, investigators with the US State Department and various watchdog groups have criticized the Thai government’s deeply inadequate enforcement; prosecutions for labor trafficking on fish boats are extremely rare, with just a handful of formal investigations in 2010 and 2011. Even the workers who are “rescued” must endure a gauntlet of legal bureaucracy and in many cases, indefinite detention, which can drag on for weeks or months and often fails to protect the impoverished and isolated workers from their former captors.
Following the reports of labor abuses, the industry issued boilerplate expressions of concern. Several multinationals vowed to work harder to follow ethical sourcing guidelines and improve supply-chain monitoring.
At the same time, Thai officials continue to crack down on the migrants, rather than their captors, targeting undocumented Burmese and Cambodians and spurring an exodus back across the porous border.
So far, these political responses sidestep, or potentially impede, the prospect of workers themselves—that is, those most impacted by these mass human rights violations—to change the industry. Deeming them “slaves” helps convey the gravity of the exploitation, but it also has the effect of dehumanizing or compartmentalizing the issue, rather than locating the structural inequalities and gradients of exploitation throughout the industry.
However, there are worker-led structures in place that can wage a meaningful challenge against both the criminal trafficking underground and the legal plunder of the ocean economy. In fact, there is a long tradition of radical maritime unionism. In the early twentieth century, dock and ship workers were at the helm of militant internationalist labor campaigns, organizing at key trade chokepoints across global ports. But in Thailand today, less than 5 percent of the workforce is unionized, and many, particularly undocumented migrants, lack real collective bargaining rights. In the fisheries, EJF Executive Director Steve Trent tells The Nation via e-mail, “the prospect of meaningful workplace representation is even more remote…. Workers on piers and fishing boats complain that grievances have to be channeled through gangmasters—the same individuals often responsible for their abuse and exploitation in the first place—who are typically bi-lingual and free to mediate between the management and workers according to their own interests.”
Though lax regulation and huge consumer demand help Western retailers to prosper while suppressing labor costs, conversely, empowering workers would not only help remedy the gravest abuses but also ensure the industry’s sustainability in the long term.

Migrant workers from Myanmar clean a fishing net as they sail out of the port of Mahacha. (Reuters/Damir Sagolj)
Trent says policymakers need to understand “the clear link between illegal fishing, declining fish stocks and human rights abuses.” Environmental stewardship can provide a more sustainable economic balance in the ecosystem. Better management of catch rates would mean less pressure for long, arduous and high-risk forays into foreign waters. So by restoring some ecological balance, the ocean economy becomes more sustainable, less risky and less prone to labor exploitation.
Liz Blackshaw, leader of the ITF-IUF (International Transport Workers’ Federation–International Union of Food Workers) Catcher to Counter program), says that so far efforts to regulate the fishing industry haven’t linked sustainability measures with corporate accountability. “If you look at the policy framework in this industry, the majority of it is in place to safeguard the catch not the catchers,” she explains via e-mail. Effective international labor accords or trade regulations would trace the product and the labor to corporate actors.
In ITF-IUF campaigns in the Asia Pacific region, Blackshaw says, “the challenge is to find a way to organize that incorporates different facets” of a fractured contract-based production system. For example, one approach might be to start with organizing cannery workers, using their demands to anchor a baseline for working conditions, and then “work backwards along the supply chain to the fishing fleet.” A pilot project based on this model has made some inroads in Papua New Guinea’s embattled maritime sector, where the union says that incremental organizing around wages and infrastructure have helped advance labor reforms, including measures to raise the minimum wage.
In addition to strengthening international monitoring of the industry, workers can organize at the grassroots on multiple fronts—consolidating consumer support for human rights, environmentalists’ focus on sustainability, and cross-sector labor organizing.
In Blackshaw’s view, “we are now at a point where we could start calling for consumer boycotts, revocation of fishing licenses for breaches of fundamental rights; demanding safety inspections for trade purposes, etc. We cannot organize this industry vessel by vessel; plant by plant, we have a sophisticated and systematic model for organizing which is already introducing a labour narrative into what has historically been a sustainability-only debate.”
Until the seafood business starts valuing workers lives as much as it does the size of the catch, the precarious labor system on Thailand’s waters is destined to sink under its own weight.


FROM BLICK (SWITZERLAND):

***So streng ist der Chef von Qatar Airways
ZÜRICH - Wer heiratet oder schwanger ist, fliegt bei Qatar Airways in hohem Bogen raus. Firmen mit unwürdigen Arbeitsbedingungen sind kein Einzelfall.
  • Publiziert: 27.06.2014, Aktualisiert: 28.06.2014


Bild1 / 3

  • Berüchtigt: Qatar-Chef Akbar al Baker.  AFP



Er ist der härteste Chef der Welt – der CEO der arabischen Fluggesellschaft Qatar Airways, ­Akbar al-Baker (52). Nun prangert die Internationale Gewerkschaft ITF seinen ­Umgang mit den Angestellten öffentlich an.
«Die Angestellten von Qatar Airways, vor allem das Kabinenpersonal, haben uns eine Kultur der Angst beschrieben – Angst vor willkürlicher Kündigung, Angst vor Abschiebung», sagte Gabriel Macho von der ITF der «Bild».
Zum Traualtar geht es nur mit dem Ok des Chefs
Vor allem die weiblichen Angestellten leiden unter den massiven Auf­lagen. So kündigt Qatar ­automatisch Mitarbeiterinnen, wenn sie schwanger sind. Für neue Mitarbeiter gilt eine fünfjährige Heiratssperre. Wer danach vor den Traualtar will, muss zuerst den Chef um Erlaubnis fragen.
Ebenfalls streng verboten für Crew-Mitglieder: in Uniform eine Bar betreten – selbst wenn sie dort nur ein Glas Wasser trinken möchten. Auch Kaugummi kauen, rauchen und das Benutzen von Handys ist nicht erlaubt solange die Arbeitskleidung getragen wird.
Zusammen mit einer zweiten Gewerkschaft hat ITF Anfang Monat die Fluggesellschaft mit Sitz in ­Katar bei der Internationalen Arbeitsorganisation ­angezeigt.
Bei Abercrombie wird in Flipflops gearbeitet
Qatar ist kein Einzelfall. Immer wieder machen Firmen mit unwürdigen Arbeitsbedingungen auf sich aufmerksam. Ebenfalls heisser Anwärter auf den Titel als fiesester Chef hat Mike Jeffries von der Kultmarke Abercrombie und Fitsch (A&F).
Der notorische Kontrollfreak schreibt bis zur Unterhose seinen Angestellten an Board seiner Jets alles vor. Laut einem Handbuch müssen diese von Kopf bis Fuss in A&F gekleidet sein, nach dem hauseigenen Parfum riechen und Flipflops tragen.
Zur Ausstaffierung gehört auch ein Wintermantel. Allerdings darf dieser nur bei einer Temperatur unter 10 Grad getragen werden – und nur mit aufgeschlagenem Kragen.
Primark-Näher müssen «wie die Ochsen» arbeiten
Ebenfalls am Pragner ist zur Zeit die englisch-irische Textilkette Billigmode-Kette Primark. Zur Zeit finden Kunden in Kleidungsstücken rätselhafte Zettel, auf denen Arbeitsbedingungen angeprangert werden.
Auf einem Etikett in einer Hose machte ein anonym Schreibender geltend, er und seine Kollegen müssten «wie Ochsen» arbeiten. Das Essen, das ihnen zur Verfügung gestellt werde, wäre für Tiere ungeniessbar.
Kurz zuvor war ein eingenähter Zettel in einem Kleid aufgetaucht, der die Aufschrift trug: «Zur Arbeit bis zur Erschöpfung gezwungen».
Primark selbst zweifelt die Echtheit der Hilferufe an. Die Kleiderfirma steht aber nicht zum ersten Mal wegen ihren Arbeitsbedingungen in der Kritik.
Sie war eine der westlichen Firmen, die auch in jenem Gebäude in Bangladesch produzierten, das im vergangenen Jahr einstürzte und 1100 Todesopfer forderte. (cst)




FROM ESFYN (GREECE):


OIKONOMIA Με κοινή δήλωσή τους εκατοντάδες ακαδημαϊκοί, καλλιτέχνες, δημοσιογράφοι, συνδικαλιστές και πολιτικοί -κυρίως από τη Βρετανία- καταδικάζουν την άρνηση του αμερικανικού Ανώτατου Δικαστηρίου να επιδικάσει την έφεση της Αργεντινής στην υπόθεση εναντίον των ληστρικών κερδοσκοπικών κεφαλαίων.
«Τέτοιου είδους κεφάλαια αγοράζουν υποτιμημένο χρέος σε εξευτελιστικές τιμές από τους αρχικούς πιστωτές και στη συνέχεια επιδιώκουν την αποπληρωμή του μέσω ένδικων μέσων. Ακόμη και μια απειροελάχιστη δικαστική επιτυχία μπορεί να τους αποφέρει αξιοσημείωτα κέρδη από τις μικρές αρχικές τους επενδύσεις», υπογραμμίζουν οι υπογράφοντες, μεταξύ των οποίων οι Έλληνες καθηγητές Πανεπιστημίου στη Βρετανία, Κώστας Δουζίνας και Κώστας Λαπαβίτσας, και τονίζουν ότι η ετυμηγορία της αμερικανικής Δικαιοσύνης:
α) θέτει σε κίνδυνο την κανονική αποπληρωμή του χρέους της Αργεντινής προς το 90% και πλέον των πιστωτών της, που αποδέχτηκαν τη διαγραφή του χρέους,
β) απορρίπτει οποιαδήποτε έννοια ευθύνης του πιστωτή για το επισφαλές χρέος και κατά συνέπεια οποιαδήποτε υποχρέωση αυτού για επαναδιαπραγμάτευση,
γ) αν οδηγήσει σε μια νέα χρεοκοπία την Αργεντινή θα αναιρεθούν προσπάθειες ετών από την κυβέρνηση της χώρας για επανένταξη στις κεφαλαιαγορές,
δ) ενδεχομένως να φέρει αντίθετα αποτελέσματα και για τη Νέα Υόρκη, αφού πιθανότατα θα απομακρύνει τους δανειολήπτες από την κεφαλαιαγορά της προς άλλες πιο εύτακτες,
ε) αποτελεί σοβαρή απειλή όχι μόνο για την Αργεντινή αλλά για όλες τις αναπτυσσόμενες και ανεπτυγμένες χώρες.
Αναλυτικά η επιστολή
«Εμείς οι υπογεγραμμένοι καταδικάζουμε την απόφαση του Ανώτατου Δικαστηρίου των ΗΠΑ να απορρίψει την έφεση της Αργεντινής στην υπόθεση εναντίον των ληστρικών κερδοσκοπικών κεφαλαίων (γύπες). Τέτοιου είδους κεφάλαια αγοράζουν υποτιμημένο χρέος σε εξευτελιστικές τιμές από τους αρχικούς πιστωτές και στη συνέχεια επιδιώκουν την αποπληρωμή του μέσω ένδικων μέσων. Ακόμη και μια απειροελάχιστη επιτυχία μπορεί να τους φέρει αξιοσημείωτα κέρδη από τις μικρές αρχικές τους 'επενδύσεις’.
»Οι αρχικές αποφάσεις κατώτερου δικαστηρίου των ΗΠΑ υπέρ των ληστρικών κεφαλαίων τροφοδότησαν ήδη έντονη κριτική από αρκετές πλευρές. Περισσότεροι από 100 Βρετανοί βουλευτές εξέφρασαν την ανησυχία τους για το ότι 'τα κεφάλαια-γύπες εμποδίζουν τη δίκαια εφαρμογή της αναδιάρθρωσης ενός χρέους' και προέτρεψαν τη βρετανική κυβέρνηση να μοιραστεί την εμπειρία της για τη θεσμοθέτηση της λειτουργίας αυτών των κεφαλαίων με την αντίστοιχη αμερικανική και να υποβάλλει προτάσεις νόμων οι οποίοι θα απαγορεύουν στα κερδοσκοπικά κεφάλαια να αψηφούν τις διεθνείς συμφωνίες αναδιάρθρωσης χρέους για την Αργεντινή και την Ελλάδα στα βρετανικά δικαστήρια. »Υποστήριξαν ακόμη τη δημιουργία ενός δίκαιου, ανεξάρτητου και διαφανούς μηχανισμού διαιτησίας για το κρατικό χρέος.
»Το G77 μαζί με το China Group -ένα πολύπλευρο μπλοκ 133 χωρών απ’ όλον τον κόσμο- δηλώνουν ακόμη ότι 'δίνουν 0μφαση στη σημασία της απαγόρευσης στα κερδοσκοπικά κεφάλαια να παραλύουν τις προσπάθειες αναδιάρθρωσης του χρέους των αναπτυσσόμενων χωρών ή της άρνησης του δικαιώματος των κρατών να προστατεύσουν τους πολίτες τους υπό το διεθνή νόμο’.
»Προς χάριν των συμφερόντων μιας μικρής μειοψηφίας απατεώνων κερδοσκόπων, το Ανώτατο Δικαστήριο έθεσε σε κίνδυνο την κανονική αποπληρωμή του χρέους της Αργεντινής προς περισσότερους από το 90% των πιστωτών, οι οποίοι αποδέχθηκαν την ουσιαστική διαγραφή τους χρέους στον απόηχο της στάσης πληρωμών της χώρας πριν από μια δεκαετία.
»Η ετυμηγορία απορρίπτει οποιαδήποτε έννοια ευθύνης του πιστωτή για τα επισφαλή χρέη και κατά συνέπεια οποιαδήποτε υποχρέωση αυτού να επαναδιαπραγματευτεί.
»Αν η ετυμηγορία ωθήσει σε μια νέα μια χρεοκοπία την Αργεντινή, θα αναιρεθούν προσπάθειες ετών από την κυβέρνηση για επανένταξή της στις κεφαλαιαγορές ως φερέγγυος δανειολήπτης.
»Τέλος, το Ανώτατο Δικαστήριο ισχυρίζεται ότι έδρασε για τη διαφύλαξη της θέσης της Νέας Υόρκης ως κορυφαίας κεφαλαιαγοράς του κόσμου. Ωστόσο οι επιπτώσεις ενδεχομένως να είναι οι αντίθετες και οι δανειολήπτες να στραφούν προς πιο εύτακτες αγορές.
»Αυτή η απόφαση αποτελεί σοβαρή απειλή όχι μόνο για την Αργεντινή και τον λαό της αλλά για όλες τις αναπτυσσόμενες και ανεπτυγμένες χώρες.
»Συμμετέχουμε σε αυτό το διεθνές τμήμα της κοινής γνώμης καλώντας τα σχετικά νομοθετικά σώματα να απορρίψουν την απόφαση του δικαστηρίου και ξεκινούμε τις εργασίες για τη δημιουργία ενός δίκαιου, ανεξάρτητου και διαφανούς μηχανισμού διαιτησίας για το δημόσιο χρέος».
Οι υπογράφοντες

EREMY CORBYN (MP Labour) – ROGER GODSIFF (MP Labour) – ANDREW GWYNNE (MP Labour) – JOHN McDONNELL (MP Labour) – GRAHAME MORRIS (MP Labour) – GEORGE GALLOWAY (MP Respect Party) – JOHN LEECH (MP Lib-Dem) – NEIL FINDLAY (MSP Scottish Labour Party) – ELAINE SMITH (MSP, Presiding Officer, Scottish Labour Party) – COLIN BURGON (Former MP Labour) – ALAN FREEMAN (Economist) - COSTAS DOUZINAS (Director of the Birkbeck Institute for the Humanities at Birkbeck, University of London) –  JOHN KING (Professor of Latin American Studies, University of Warwick) – ANDY DENIS (Department of Economics, City University London) – GUILLERMO MAKIN (Cambridge University) – BEN FINE (Professor of Economics, University of London’s School of Oriental and African Studies, SOAS) – JOHN WEEKS (Economist, SOAS, University of London) – TERRY MCKINLEY (Director, Centre for Development Policy and Research, SOAS) – COSTAS LAPAVITSAS (SOAS, University of London) – MALCOLM SAWYER (Department of Economics, University of Leeds) – DOREEN MASSEY (Professor, Open University) – CARLOS OYA (Department of Development Studies, SOAS, University of London) – SIMON MOHUN (Emeritus Professor, Queen Mary University of London) – JAN TOPOROWSKI (Department of Economics, SOAS, University of London) – CHRISTOPHER CRAMER (Professor of Economics, SOAS, University of London) – JOHN GRAHL (Professor of Economics, Middlesex University) – MICHAEL BURKE (Socialist Economic Bulletin) – RONALD STAMPER (Professor (r), University of Twente, the Netherlands) – HULYA DAGDEVIREN (Professor, University of Hertfordshire) – TURAN SUBASAT (Economics,  University of Izmir, Turkey) – ALEXIS LITVINE (Trinity College, Cambridge) – FRANCISCO PANIZZA (Professor, London School of Economics) – FRANCISCO DOMINGUEZ (Professor, University of Middlesex) – MATAS VERNENGO (Associate Professor, Bucknell University) – JEFF TAN (Economist, Aga Khan University) – PRITAM SINGH (Economics Professor, Oxford Brookes University) RADHIKA DESAI (Economist, Professor, University of Manitoba) – NICOLA ACOCELLA (Faculty of Economics, La Sapienza, University of Rome) – TREVOR EVANS (Professor of Economics, Berlin School of Economics and Law) – ENGELBERT STOCHAMMER (Professor of Economics, Kingston University) – ANIS CHOWDHURY (Former Professor of Economics, University of Western Sydney) – OSLEM ONARAN (Professor of Economics, University of Greenwich) – CHANTAL MOUFFE DE LACLAU (Writer) – JULIAN ASSANGE (Publisher of WIKILEAKS) – JOSEPH FARRELL (Ambassador of WIKILEAKS) – CLLR MARTIN TIEDEMANN (Labour and Co-operative Councillor, London Borough of Lambeth) – ROSE CORWAY-WALSH (Sinn Fin) – TARIQ ALI (Writer, Journalist and Filmmaker) – RICHARD GOTT (Writer, Journalist) – BRIAN PRECIOUS (Journalist) – JEREMY FOX (Writer, Open Democracy) – JOHN WILSON (President, Anglo Argentine Society) – SERGIO SCHUCHINSKY (President, Asociacin de Argentinos en Inglaterra, ARENIN) – GAVIN MACFAYDEN (Director, Centre for Investigative Journalism, Goldsmiths, University of London) – JEFF MADRICK (Century Foundation) – BILLY HAYES (General Secretary, Communication Workers Union, CWU) – DOUG NICHOLLS (General Secretary, General Federation of Trade Unions, GFTU) – BERNARD REGAN (Chair, South East Region International Committee, Trade Union Congress, TUC) – NICOLA HOARAU (The National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers, RMT) – MICHAEL CARTY (RMT) – DAVID WALLIS (RMT) – JACQUE WALLIS (RMT) – ALEX GORDON (Former President RMT and General Secretary candidate) – GABRIEL MOCHO RODRIGUEZ (International Transport Workers Federation, ITF) – ENRIQUE LOZANO (ITF) – YURY SUKHORUKOV (ITF) – ROB MILLER (Director Cuba Solidarity Campaign) – KEITH SONNET (Cuba Solidarity Campaign) – MATT WILGRESS (Venezuela Solidarity Campaign and North London Stop the War Coalition) – ANDY NEWMAN (Labour parliamentary candidate, Chippenham) – MAGGIE BOWDEN (General Secretary, Liberation, formerly the Movement for Colonial Freedom) – AARON KIELY (National Union of Students, NEC) – RICHARD BAGLEY (Editor, Morning Star) – JOHN HAYLETT (Political Editor, Morning Star) – LUKE DANIELS (President, Caribbean Labour Solidarity) – MIKE PHIPPS (Labour Representation Committee) – ROB GRIFFITHS (General Secretary, Communist Party of Britain) – CARLOS MARTINEZ (Music Producer) – JOHN GREEN (Journalist and author) – BRUNI DE LA MOTTE (Academic) – TIM SIRET (Comrades of the World) – TANIA BRONSTEIN (Chair, Latin American Women’s Rights Service) – JUAN CARLOS PIEDRA (Director, Movimiento Ecuador en el Reino Unido) – ANCIZAR MORALES (The Latin American School of Artistic and Cultural Education, ESFORAL) – SUSAN BENN (President Performing Arts Labs) – GERONIMO ENRIQUE RAUCH (Actor-Singer) – JOHN PILGER (Journalist, film-maker) – MABEL ENCINAS (Former Coordinator of the Latin American Recognition Campaign, LARC) – MEL GOLBERG (Lawyer, Director of Sport Lawyer Association) – LUIS APARICIO (CEO, Emerging Markets Associates of London, EMA).
FROM THE JOURNAL OF COMMERCE:

Port labor strife: Time to talk the talk
Jordan W. Cowman
868 words
29 June 2014
Journal of Commerce Online
JOCO
English
(c) 2014 Commonwealth Business Media. All rights reserved.
Millions — even billions — of dollars. Each day. What could possibly cost that much? Well, seaport strikes and labor disputes, to start.
Although port labor strikes are anything but a recent phenomenon, the recent pace of strikes is quickening in response to escalating economic changes worldwide. A simple Internet browser search on “port strike” will yield such results as “Seaport strike costing U.S. economy $1B a day”; “Chile is losing more than $200M a day due to port worker strike”; “Port Hedland (Australia) facing $100M a day strike threat.” Labor strikes recently have hit ports in India, the U.S., Cyprus, Brazil, Egypt, Argentina, Hong Kong, Portugal and Australia.
Why is this compelling? Because few things touch every national economy more pervasively than seaports. Seaports are the international hubs for global commerce. Indeed, activity in ports has a material influence on the free flow of goods, and therefore the greater economy, throughout the supply chain. And seaports’ importance to the global economy will only increase in the future, experts agree.
Studies and reports from authoritative sources such as the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, the JOC, the European Commission and others confirm that seaport cargo volumes will rise significantly over the next 20 years.
Anticipating growth in seaport activity, public-private partnerships, governments and the private sector are investing in infrastructure to handle the additional workload. The Panama Canal expansion project is the most notable example, but large-scale port expansion, dredging and infrastructure undertakings are increasingly common. Carriers continue to order larger ships, with some capable of carrying more than 18,000 20-foot-equivalent container units.
Yet with all of this busy preparation, one critical aspect of port success is being ignored at our peril: the relationship between seaport labor and its management. To meet the demands arising from the anticipated growth, labor-management relations must adapt to the changing needs of seaports. If they don’t, the port strike headlines of today will continue to proliferate in the future, with corresponding increases in human cost and financial loss.
So, while all the building and dredging is in process, business, labor and government leaders should wake up to the moral and financial imperative that they should work together to address the pressing and unmet need for social dialogue in the port sector.
Although our global economy continues to modernize with 21st century capacity, industrial relations in most of the world’s ports are mired in adversarial frameworks and process of the 19th and 20th centuries.
Ports must adjust not only their infrastructures but also their ability to provide services in a labor environment that keeps pace with competitive pressures. Increasingly, ports compete against each other, because shippers have multiple options of where to unload their cargo. As a result, labor unrest at a specific port, while causing significant local damage, might not lead to the kind of economic pressure it once did.
Ports that maintain a reputation for unstable labor issues become less desirable in the shipping economy, particularly where alternative ports are readily available. Bilateral, regional and multilateral trade agreements diminish the significance of political borders, which once served as the sole criterion of which port a shipper must use.
Social dialogue, the process of consensus building among workers, employers and government, and the resulting improvements in labor-management relations, is recognized widely as a key component of port competiveness by providing the stakeholders with effective tools to develop a stable, reliable workforce. But social dialogue is neither intuitive nor a naturally occurring exercise.
Therefore, without sustained, targeted efforts to teach and foster effective social dialogue, the future of stable labor relations remains in question. Success in this area is currently hit or miss. New policy spaces for social dialogue in the port sector have opened, but have yet to be filled. Successful models of improved efficiency, dispute prevention and resolution remain largely unexplored.
Emerging and important efforts are underway to improve labor relations in seaports. The University of Texas at Dallas, for example, is undertaking groundbreaking research and meaningfully engaged in study and practice of social dialogue in the port sector. UT Dallas is creating effective training materials, innovative training methods and platforms for social dialogue outreach into the port sector. In addition, the European Commission, following research and analysis, last year took the unprecedented step of creating sector-specific legislation in this area.
No government, business, union or nongovernmental organization can fiat meaningful change in seaport industrial relations, but the coming increases in port business and their associated market pressures demand change nonetheless. Prepared or not, ports in the future will face a more dynamic competitive environment. Enhanced social dialogue in the port sector is something every stakeholder — unions, employer organizations and governments — can agree upon.
Jordan W. Cowman is a shareholder in the international law firm of Greenberg Traurig in Dallas. His practice focuses on international labor and employment law. He also is an adjunct professor of international business at the University of Texas at Dallas, where he leads a team engaged in research and practical solutions regarding social dialogue in seaports. Contact him at  Этот e-mail адрес защищен от спам-ботов, для его просмотра у Вас должен быть включен Javascript .