ILA Strike Watch 2025: “ILA members are ready to make the ultimate sacrifice to win this battle”

 In container shipping, Container Shipping & Transport, export, exporting, exports, ILA, ILA Strike, ILA Strike Watch, ILA Strike Watch 2025, import, importing, Imports, International Shipping, maritime shipping, ocean freight, ocean shipping, shippers, shipping, shipping news, Supply Chain

41 Days…

Tuesday’s blog had a positive tone regarding the situation with the International Longshoremen’s Association (ILA) at East and Gulf Coast ports. The union’s praise for President Trump and his choice of Lori Chavez-DeRemer for Labor Secretary lent to optimism that the union might work with the incoming administration, be open to mediation from it, and not shut down U.S. ports and supply chains with a strike.

ILA Dockworkers Prepare for Strike as Watch Counts Down

While today’s post doesn’t negate that, the tone shifts toward the negative as the ILA has upped its strike talk, lending toward pessimism that shippers could again see their supply chains disrupted by East and Gulf Coast ports shutting down in the seemingly likely event there is no new Master Contract reached between the ILA and United States Maritime Alliance (USMX) by the January 15th deadline.

Unfortunately, rather than talking about negotiating, the ILA is talking strike right now. Yesterday (December 4th), the ILA said it “is prepared to strike again if an agreement is not reach by January 15, 2025.”

Automation Fight Is for Survival

ILA President Harold Daggett, who’s never understated, said, “Our ILA members are ready to make the ultimate sacrifice to win this battle against automation.”

From context, I’d assume everyone would understand that by “make the ultimate sacrifice” Daggett means to go on strike, losing the income that would be made by working during that time, rather than to die as the phrase would normally mean. However, the ILA president’s hyperbole does highlight how the union sees the issue of automation as an existential threat.

Daggett made sure to drive this point home, adding, “They understand it’s a fight for their very survival.”

Of course, on the other end, the USMX sees port modernization, which would include technologies that must at least utilize some automation, as a necessity to keep up with growing cargo volume demands at the ports. Simultaneously, the USMX insists there are benefits for the ILA with this modernization:

“Port operations must evolve, and embracing modern technology is critical to this evolution. It means improving performance to move more cargo more efficiently through existing facilities – advancements that are crucial for U.S. workers, consumers, and companies,” the USMX says.

The evolution is especially crucial at East and Gulf Coast ports, according to the USMX, because of space constraints.

“Due to the lack of available new land in most ports, the only way for U.S. East and Gulf Coast ports to handle more volume is to densify terminals – enabling the movement of more cargo through their existing footprints. It has been proven this can be accomplished while delivering benefits to both USMX members and to the ILA.”

With semi-automated rail-mounted gantry cranes (RMGs) cranes at the center of the breakdown of negotiations between the ILA and USMX, the USMX explains how those cranes by significantly increasing terminal capacity not only increase cargo volume at terminals but increase work hours, jobs, and wages to the union:

USMX is not, nor has it ever been, seeking to eliminate jobs, but to simply implement and maintain the use of equipment and technology already allowed under the current contract agreements and already widely in use, including at some USMX ports.

A USMX terminal where modern crane technology was implemented more than a decade ago was previously limited to a 775,000-container capacity using traditional equipment. Yet, that same terminal nearly doubled its volume after incorporating the use of modern rail-mounted gantry cranes into its daily operations.

The added capacity delivered an equal increase in hours worked, leading to more union jobs, as the terminal went from employing approximately 600 workers a day to nearly 1,200. Moving more containers through the existing terminal footprints also means higher wages from the increased cargo, bringing in more money for volume/tonnage bonuses.

On ILA’s Facebook page, Dennis Daggett, ILA Executive Vice President and the son of Harold Daggett, countered USMX’s argument:

Today, employers are pushing to expand RMGs, claiming they are only “semi-automated” and necessary for safety and productivity. But let’s break this down.

The reality is that 95% of the work performed by RMGs is fully automated. From the moment a container is dropped off by a shuttle carrier, the RMG operates on its own lifting, stacking, and moving containers, including gantry and hoisting, without any human intervention. This includes the auto-stacking of containers in the container stack, which is also fully automated. Only in the last six feet of the container’s journey on the landside, when it is placed on a truck chassis, does an operator step in. But how long until employers automate those final six feet as well?

This isn’t about safety or productivity—it’s about job elimination. The ILA has proven through data and real-world operations that RMGs are not more productive than traditional equipment operated by human workers. Faced with this evidence, employers have shifted their argument. Now, they claim that RMGs are needed to densify terminals and push out more volume, emphasizing their ability to stack nine containers across compared to six with traditional rubber-tired gantry cranes (RTGs). But this argument doesn’t hold up under scrutiny either. With all the advancements in technology, why can’t manufacturers design human-operated equipment capable of achieving the same density? This isn’t about meeting operational needs—it’s about replacing workers under the guise of progress while maximizing corporate profits at the expense of good-paying, family-sustaining U.S. jobs.

Strike Threat Must Be Taken Seriously

It’s clear to see the parties are far apart on this topic, especially as the ILA cut off talks in the second day of four that were scheduled for negotiations as soon as USMX brought up RMGs.

The union’s threat of strike over it has to be taken very seriously. The way things are currently playing out parallels the lead-up to ILA’s 3-day strike in October. The union said then it was immovable on the issue of wages. Its president said the ILA would strike without a new deal by the September 30th deadline. The union cancelled talks and wouldn’t return to the table before that deadline hit. Now, we have the threat of a strike without a new deal again. The ILA says it’s immovable on the issue of automation. It cancelled talks. So far, it has refused to return to the table, saying negotiations are at an impasse.

The ILA also has pointed to the previous strike to make sure their current threat of strike is being taken seriously. “The ILA clearly understands the importance of securing a Master Contract Agreement that fully protects its members and already showed they would strike to win their demands,” the union said.

Shippers are left hoping right now that despite a similar lead-up to the last strike, we get a different result this time. Of course, not all is being left to hope. Many shippers have been front-loading imports to avoid another possible strike as well as diverting discretional cargo through West Coast ports.

Click Here for Free Air Freight Pricing
Click here for free freight rate pricing

ILA Strike & Strike Watch Posts

ILA Already Threatening Strike

ILA Stance Is Worse Than Just Threatening Strike

We Have to Talk About the ILA Strike Threat

How to Prepare for Potential ILA Port Disruption

No One Knows What Will Happen with ILA Port Disruption

Early Peak Season, High Freight Rates, & 5 Factors Shaping Ocean Freight Shipping 2024

ILA Strike Watch 2024: Cancelled Talks & Strike Threat Increase

Are There Any Signs the Early Peak Season Is Slowing Down?

ILA Strike Watch 2024 – US Trade Groups Ask Biden to Get ILA to Negotiation Table

ILA Strike Watch 2024: Biden No, Trump Yes?

ILA Strike Watch 2024: ILA Says Strike More Likely

ILA Strike Watch 2024: Union Rejects Wage Offer & Prepares to Strike

ILA Strike Watch 2024: With 1 Month Till Strike, ILA Flips on Mediation

ILA Strike Watch 2024: ILA Announces Unanimous Support for Strike

ILA Strike Watch 2024: Fight Intensifies – Strike Extremely Likely – Full Text of USMX Statement & ILA’s Scathing Response

ILA Strike Watch 2024: Will White House Stop Strike?

ILA Strike Watch 2024: Biden Won’t Stop Strike

ILA Strike Watch 2024: House Committee Writes Letter to Biden Urging Administration to Aid Negotiations (w/ Full Text)

ILA Strike Watch 2024: Here’s How Much ILA Members Make & How Much They Demand Ahead of Strike Tuesday

Shipper Alert – ILA Strike Is On!

ILA Strike – Biden Plays Union Politics Instead of Protecting U.S. Economy

ILA Strike – Secretary of Labor’s Unbelievable Statement About Negotiations

Shipper Alert – ILA Strike Ends!

ILA Strike Aftermath – It’s Not Over Yet & Wage Agreement May Become Problem

ILA Strike Watch 2025: ILA’s October Strike to Affect Global Supply Chains thru Mid-November

ILA Strike Watch 2025: ILA USMX to Resume Talks in November

Here We go Again – ILA Stops Contract Talks – ILA Strike Watch 2025

Importers Write Biden to Increase Efforts to Stop Red Sea Terrorism and Write ILA & USMX to Negotiate & Prevent Strike

ILA Strike Watch 2025: Does ILA’s Praise for Trump’s Labor Secretary NOM Bode Well for Deal & No Strike?

Leave a Comment