11 ms·

Half the so called dock workers don’t actually work. They sit at home and collect, “container royalties”. https://nypost.com/2024/10/04/business/how-did-50k-d

Half the so called dock workers don’t actually work. They sit at home and collect, “container royalties”. https://nypost.com/2024/10/04/business/how-did-50k-dockworkers-strike-at-us-ports-with-only-25k-jobs/ https://nypost.com/2024/10/04/business/how-did-50k-dockworke...

JoBrad 2y ago
If true, that seems a little nuts. Have any more info on this?
- stonemetal12 2y ago
  True in that container royalties is a thing, but stated so sensationally as to make it lying. You don't get royalties for nothing. All the references I have been able to find, say you have to work some amount based on Union agreements but somewhere between 700 and 1500 hours per year, and you have to have worked at the port for at least 6 years. They seem to mostly be paid out as an end of year bonus. I haven't found anything that ballparks the amount so I have no clue how much money we are talking about.
tivert 2y ago
[flagged]
- ImPostingOnHN 2y ago
  I agree, we and the union workers should vote in a government that helps people who lose their jobs to progress. After all, it's the job of a government, not a company, to serve the needs of the people.
  - tivert 2y ago
    > I agree, we and the union workers should vote in a government that helps people who lose their jobs to progress. You have an incorrect, oversimple model of politics (e.g. business interests have shown much more capability in influencing government on economic policy to suit their own goals than pretty much every other group, and there are a lot of reasons for that). You use "progress" in a really suspect way, like it's a line pointing one way. It's really about whose progress it is. etc. > After all, it's the job of a government, not a company, to serve the needs of the people. I disagree, and I think that idea is actually at the root of a lot of problems.
    - ImPostingOnHN 2y ago
      > You have an incorrect, oversimple model of politics I disagree, I believe I have a correct, appropriately complex model of politics. I guess our opinions cancel each other out, and we'll have to agree to disagree on this point, friend. > business interests have shown much more capability in influencing government on economic policy to suit their own goals I actually agree here: business is great at influencing policy in a way that suits their goals, but not necessarily in a way that suits the goals of society or individuals. The 2 goals are different, that's why we can't rely upon the former to achieve the goals of the latter. It's the goal of business to make money, it's the goal of unions and people to make sure people are taken care of, so unions and people should vote for a government that takes care of people. >> After all, it's the job of a government, not a company, to serve the needs of the people. > I disagree, and I think that idea is actually at the root of a lot of problems. That is a valid viewpoint. Another valid viewpoint is, thinking that idea is at the root of a lot of problems, is itself at the root of a lot of problems. Unfortunately, without any detail provided either way, all we have now is 2 conflicting, equally-valid viewpoints.
- infamouscow 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - consteval 2y ago
    > These people are nothing more than glorified Amazon workers Yes, with one key difference: They were smart enough to recognize the value of their labor in the market, and have joined together to have better leverage.
  - tivert 2y ago
    > These people are nothing more than glorified Amazon workers. And what's that supposed to mean? It sounds like you feel they're low status and therefore undeserving. > This isn't the hill to die on. People viscerally feel this isn't a job which can justify itself—because it can't. But somehow, the job of just owning a bunch of shit and living off the proceeds doesn't seem offend people the same way, when it's literally the same thing. > Besides, royalties are an artificial construction enforced by governments through courts and obedient police force that will kill you if you don't go along with what they say. You know what else is like that? Private property.
JumpCrisscross 2y ago
Do they ever work? The article notes that “as container ships have gotten larger, container volumes have often gotten less steady, with more peaks and troughs. Highly varying volumes might be more easily handled by a human labor force that can be scaled up and down as needed.”
- RobotToaster 2y ago
  > human labor force that can be scaled up and down as needed. Is that corporate speak for insecure employment?
  - hn_throwaway_99 2y ago
    No, it seems like the comment you are responding to is specifically arguing that a "bench" may be needed (with workers getting paid) so that they are available during spikes in shipping volume.
- fallingknife 2y ago
  Automation can be scaled up and down much more effectively than labor. You just turn off the machines when you don't need them and turn them back on when you do.
  - kasey_junk 2y ago
    Do you have a citation for this? The article makes a fairly compelling argument that the automation in ports is not flexible in its utilization and costs, and that humans actually are more scalable in this regard.
  - dllthomas 2y ago
    There's a social sense in which you're correct - the machine wasn't counting on that wage, didn't cancel plans to be available, etc... But from a financial perspective, most of the cost for the machines is probably in buying the machines, where most of the cost of the worker is probably hourly wage (or similar). Turning off the machines probably saves less money than sending the people home.
billy99k 2y ago
This is why they are striking against automation. Those 25K will be out of jobs. It's funny how conservative (anti-technology, stuck in the past, don't want to make anything efficient) labor unions end up being when it suits them. It is the same with the cab companies. It took Uber and Lyft for them to lift a finger and actually attempt to innovate and make it better for customers.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- causal 2y ago
  You mean the remaining 25k will also be out of a job? The article linked above doesn't go into detail on what container royalties are, but it sounds like it was a protection from being laid off negotiated in the past. And in the context of AI so frequently discussed here, perhaps more workers will need those types of protections as automation takes hold elsewhere.
- Workaccount2 2y ago
  Everyone is in it for their own self interest. There are no liberals or conservatives. Their are people with lives that share common traits and a policy set that suits those traits best. Remember that Jesus (the generous saint of the needy) is the hero of conservatives and that liberals are the chief NIMBYs for affordable housing. Nobody has lifelong rigid beliefs, it's all a matter of convenience. Everyone is in it for themselves. *yes this is a generalization and you can find outliers. But don't let those outliers distract you from what is going on.
  - CaptainFever 2y ago
    This sounds like psychological egoism: https://www.qcc.cuny.edu/socialSciences/ppecorino/ETHICS_TEXT/Chapter_5_Teleological_Theories_Egoism/Psychological_Egoism.htm#:~:text=First%2C%20psychological%20egoism%20is%20a,is%20motivated%20by%20self%20interest https://www.qcc.cuny.edu/socialSciences/ppecorino/ETHICS_TEX....
- consteval 2y ago
dauertewigkeit 2y ago
If they were the International Longshoremen Company, nobody would find anything objectionable about that. They just negotiated a good contract. Good for them.
- avalys 2y ago
  Nonsense. The major difference is that port operators would be free to choose a _different_ company if they were unhappy with the terms offered.
legitster 2y ago
Longshoreman unions are some of the most powerful and corrupt. Even if you are pro-union, they have a history of attacking or undercutting other unions. The port of Portland Oregon was bankrupted because of a slowdown that was organized over two jobs they wanted to take from the electricians union. The former president of the ILWU refused to recognize the AFL-CIO. The ILA president has mob connections.
falcolas 2y ago
That's a fairly thin article. The one note about how much these laid off workers are making is just an allegation aimed at less than 3% of the total number of laid off workers, not a value with any citations. It would help a lot if there were actual figures on how much the container royalties are. And while ongoing payments are unusual, it's still basically a severance package. Those dock workers no longer work at the docks because they were let go due to automation. Do they have other jobs? Probably. The article doesn't provide any info about that either. It is the NY Post though. So I'm not super surprised by the lack of substance, just allegations.
- frankharv 2y ago
  Thin, Heck they did not even mention Norfolk Virginia. We have like 4 different ports here plus Wind Project took over the old NIT port.
coin 2y ago
Just like The Jobs Bank program the UAW and the Detroit auto makers had in the 80s and 90s. https://www.cbsnews.com/detroit/news/stellantis-uaw-lawsuit-jobs-bank-belvidere/ https://www.cbsnews.com/detroit/news/stellantis-uaw-lawsuit-... "The Jobs Bank, established by GM in the mid-80s and adopted by Ford and Chrysler due to pattern bargaining, generally prohibited the Detroit automakers from laying off employees," the automaker said. "By the 2000s, Chrysler had over 2,000 employees in the Jobs Bank at a staggering cost. These employees were on active payroll, but were not allowed to perform any production work." https://www.npr.org/2006/02/02/5185887/idled-auto-workers-tap-the-jobs-bank https://www.npr.org/2006/02/02/5185887/idled-auto-workers-ta... The Jobs Bank was set up by mutual agreement between U.S. automakers and the United Auto Workers union to protect workers from layoffs. Begun in the mid-1980s, the program is being tapped by thousands of workers. Many of those receiving checks do community service work or take courses. Others sit around, watching movies or doing crossword puzzles -- all while making $26 an hour or more.
- aaomidi 2y ago
  On the other hand, layoffs shouldn’t be free for companies. These are people who have specialized skills, have setup their families in these areas, have mortgages etc. What’s the alternative here? An alternative I can think of is a much stronger unemployment program on the federal level so layoffs don’t hurt the community. But this scheme not existing would’ve been devastating for the middle class. People in greater society are not really an elastic resource.
  - la64710 2y ago
    A great alternative is to tax corporates on the increased productivity that they achieved through layoffs and then distribute the proceeds as UBI to the affected.
    - s1artibartfast 2y ago
      "Ubi to the affected" is a contradiction of terms
ForHackernews 2y ago
As opposed to software folks who are 100% nose to the grindstone all day, never yammering on internet forums...
tourmalinetaco 2y ago
Oh the horror, on-call employees get paid for being on-call.
mistrial9 2y ago
.. watching two City workers having a meeting at a property right now.. it took more than two months to do three small repairs on the City owned lot.. one right now.. This same City is quite wealthy from property taxes and other sources here in western US coastal town.. Do these two City employees "sit home and collect money" ? Does orchestrated, planned and persistent foot-dragging with extra benefits, fall into the same outrage category as "these so-called dock workers" ? Both sets are employees.. the names are different but the outcome seems similar somehow? difficult to reconcile that one is publicly shamed, while the other gets stronger and more entrenched over time.

JoBrad 2y ago

If true, that seems a little nuts. Have any more info on this?

stonemetal12 2y ago
True in that container royalties is a thing, but stated so sensationally as to make it lying. You don't get royalties for nothing. All the references I have been able to find, say you have to work some amount based on Union agreements but somewhere between 700 and 1500 hours per year, and you have to have worked at the port for at least 6 years. They seem to mostly be paid out as an end of year bonus. I haven't found anything that ballparks the amount so I have no clue how much money we are talking about.

tivert 2y ago

[flagged]

ImPostingOnHN 2y ago
I agree, we and the union workers should vote in a government that helps people who lose their jobs to progress. After all, it's the job of a government, not a company, to serve the needs of the people.
- tivert 2y ago
  > I agree, we and the union workers should vote in a government that helps people who lose their jobs to progress. You have an incorrect, oversimple model of politics (e.g. business interests have shown much more capability in influencing government on economic policy to suit their own goals than pretty much every other group, and there are a lot of reasons for that). You use "progress" in a really suspect way, like it's a line pointing one way. It's really about whose progress it is. etc. > After all, it's the job of a government, not a company, to serve the needs of the people. I disagree, and I think that idea is actually at the root of a lot of problems.
  - ImPostingOnHN 2y ago
    > You have an incorrect, oversimple model of politics I disagree, I believe I have a correct, appropriately complex model of politics. I guess our opinions cancel each other out, and we'll have to agree to disagree on this point, friend. > business interests have shown much more capability in influencing government on economic policy to suit their own goals I actually agree here: business is great at influencing policy in a way that suits their goals, but not necessarily in a way that suits the goals of society or individuals. The 2 goals are different, that's why we can't rely upon the former to achieve the goals of the latter. It's the goal of business to make money, it's the goal of unions and people to make sure people are taken care of, so unions and people should vote for a government that takes care of people. >> After all, it's the job of a government, not a company, to serve the needs of the people. > I disagree, and I think that idea is actually at the root of a lot of problems. That is a valid viewpoint. Another valid viewpoint is, thinking that idea is at the root of a lot of problems, is itself at the root of a lot of problems. Unfortunately, without any detail provided either way, all we have now is 2 conflicting, equally-valid viewpoints.
infamouscow 2y ago
[flagged]
- consteval 2y ago
  > These people are nothing more than glorified Amazon workers Yes, with one key difference: They were smart enough to recognize the value of their labor in the market, and have joined together to have better leverage.
- tivert 2y ago
  > These people are nothing more than glorified Amazon workers. And what's that supposed to mean? It sounds like you feel they're low status and therefore undeserving. > This isn't the hill to die on. People viscerally feel this isn't a job which can justify itself—because it can't. But somehow, the job of just owning a bunch of shit and living off the proceeds doesn't seem offend people the same way, when it's literally the same thing. > Besides, royalties are an artificial construction enforced by governments through courts and obedient police force that will kill you if you don't go along with what they say. You know what else is like that? Private property.

JumpCrisscross 2y ago

Do they ever work? The article notes that “as container ships have gotten larger, container volumes have often gotten less steady, with more peaks and troughs. Highly varying volumes might be more easily handled by a human labor force that can be scaled up and down as needed.”

RobotToaster 2y ago
> human labor force that can be scaled up and down as needed. Is that corporate speak for insecure employment?
- hn_throwaway_99 2y ago
  No, it seems like the comment you are responding to is specifically arguing that a "bench" may be needed (with workers getting paid) so that they are available during spikes in shipping volume.
fallingknife 2y ago
Automation can be scaled up and down much more effectively than labor. You just turn off the machines when you don't need them and turn them back on when you do.
- kasey_junk 2y ago
  Do you have a citation for this? The article makes a fairly compelling argument that the automation in ports is not flexible in its utilization and costs, and that humans actually are more scalable in this regard.
- dllthomas 2y ago
  There's a social sense in which you're correct - the machine wasn't counting on that wage, didn't cancel plans to be available, etc... But from a financial perspective, most of the cost for the machines is probably in buying the machines, where most of the cost of the worker is probably hourly wage (or similar). Turning off the machines probably saves less money than sending the people home.

billy99k 2y ago

This is why they are striking against automation. Those 25K will be out of jobs. It's funny how conservative (anti-technology, stuck in the past, don't want to make anything efficient) labor unions end up being when it suits them. It is the same with the cab companies. It took Uber and Lyft for them to lift a finger and actually attempt to innovate and make it better for customers.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
causal 2y ago
You mean the remaining 25k will also be out of a job? The article linked above doesn't go into detail on what container royalties are, but it sounds like it was a protection from being laid off negotiated in the past. And in the context of AI so frequently discussed here, perhaps more workers will need those types of protections as automation takes hold elsewhere.
Workaccount2 2y ago
Everyone is in it for their own self interest. There are no liberals or conservatives. Their are people with lives that share common traits and a policy set that suits those traits best. Remember that Jesus (the generous saint of the needy) is the hero of conservatives and that liberals are the chief NIMBYs for affordable housing. Nobody has lifelong rigid beliefs, it's all a matter of convenience. Everyone is in it for themselves. *yes this is a generalization and you can find outliers. But don't let those outliers distract you from what is going on.
- CaptainFever 2y ago
  This sounds like psychological egoism: https://www.qcc.cuny.edu/socialSciences/ppecorino/ETHICS_TEXT/Chapter_5_Teleological_Theories_Egoism/Psychological_Egoism.htm#:~:text=First%2C%20psychological%20egoism%20is%20a,is%20motivated%20by%20self%20interest https://www.qcc.cuny.edu/socialSciences/ppecorino/ETHICS_TEX....
consteval 2y ago

dauertewigkeit 2y ago

If they were the International Longshoremen Company, nobody would find anything objectionable about that. They just negotiated a good contract. Good for them.

avalys 2y ago
Nonsense. The major difference is that port operators would be free to choose a _different_ company if they were unhappy with the terms offered.

legitster 2y ago

Longshoreman unions are some of the most powerful and corrupt. Even if you are pro-union, they have a history of attacking or undercutting other unions. The port of Portland Oregon was bankrupted because of a slowdown that was organized over two jobs they wanted to take from the electricians union. The former president of the ILWU refused to recognize the AFL-CIO. The ILA president has mob connections.

falcolas 2y ago

That's a fairly thin article. The one note about how much these laid off workers are making is just an allegation aimed at less than 3% of the total number of laid off workers, not a value with any citations. It would help a lot if there were actual figures on how much the container royalties are. And while ongoing payments are unusual, it's still basically a severance package. Those dock workers no longer work at the docks because they were let go due to automation. Do they have other jobs? Probably. The article doesn't provide any info about that either. It is the NY Post though. So I'm not super surprised by the lack of substance, just allegations.

frankharv 2y ago
Thin, Heck they did not even mention Norfolk Virginia. We have like 4 different ports here plus Wind Project took over the old NIT port.

coin 2y ago

Just like The Jobs Bank program the UAW and the Detroit auto makers had in the 80s and 90s. https://www.cbsnews.com/detroit/news/stellantis-uaw-lawsuit-jobs-bank-belvidere/ https://www.cbsnews.com/detroit/news/stellantis-uaw-lawsuit-... "The Jobs Bank, established by GM in the mid-80s and adopted by Ford and Chrysler due to pattern bargaining, generally prohibited the Detroit automakers from laying off employees," the automaker said. "By the 2000s, Chrysler had over 2,000 employees in the Jobs Bank at a staggering cost. These employees were on active payroll, but were not allowed to perform any production work." https://www.npr.org/2006/02/02/5185887/idled-auto-workers-tap-the-jobs-bank https://www.npr.org/2006/02/02/5185887/idled-auto-workers-ta... The Jobs Bank was set up by mutual agreement between U.S. automakers and the United Auto Workers union to protect workers from layoffs. Begun in the mid-1980s, the program is being tapped by thousands of workers. Many of those receiving checks do community service work or take courses. Others sit around, watching movies or doing crossword puzzles -- all while making $26 an hour or more.

aaomidi 2y ago
On the other hand, layoffs shouldn’t be free for companies. These are people who have specialized skills, have setup their families in these areas, have mortgages etc. What’s the alternative here? An alternative I can think of is a much stronger unemployment program on the federal level so layoffs don’t hurt the community. But this scheme not existing would’ve been devastating for the middle class. People in greater society are not really an elastic resource.
- la64710 2y ago
  A great alternative is to tax corporates on the increased productivity that they achieved through layoffs and then distribute the proceeds as UBI to the affected.
  - s1artibartfast 2y ago
    "Ubi to the affected" is a contradiction of terms

ForHackernews 2y ago

As opposed to software folks who are 100% nose to the grindstone all day, never yammering on internet forums...

tourmalinetaco 2y ago

Oh the horror, on-call employees get paid for being on-call.

mistrial9 2y ago

.. watching two City workers having a meeting at a property right now.. it took more than two months to do three small repairs on the City owned lot.. one right now.. This same City is quite wealthy from property taxes and other sources here in western US coastal town.. Do these two City employees "sit home and collect money" ? Does orchestrated, planned and persistent foot-dragging with extra benefits, fall into the same outrage category as "these so-called dock workers" ? Both sets are employees.. the names are different but the outcome seems similar somehow? difficult to reconcile that one is publicly shamed, while the other gets stronger and more entrenched over time.