I feel like this article says it pretty well: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/12/13/BAFC1MBL7C.DTL
The ILWU shut down the port at the beginning of the Iraq War. They are a progressive union, especially the Bay Area locals. The Teamsters, not so much. I wouldn't stand in front of their trucks. I'm glad no one got hurt; that was a real possibility. I understand everyone's grievances, etc., the support of the miscategorized "independent contractor" (IC) drivers who aren't able to be represented by a union. As for the labor struggle in Longview, WA, I think the ILWU, not Occupy, is best able to represent themselves there.
In 2000-2001, I organized bike messengers under ILWU Local 6, although my company chose to shut down rather than face a union election (a typical tactic). I have the utmost respect for the ILWU and its elected officials, who helped us all along. Here's what the ILWU President had to say about the Occupy shutdown: http://www.longshoreshippingnews.com/2011/12/message-from-pres-mcellrath-we-share-occupys-concerns-about-america-but-egt-battle-is-complicated/
Here's something to think about: the Panama Canal is being widened to accomodate the larger container ships that must now dock in West Coast Ports. A recent issue of *Trains* magazine had a feature story about East Coast railroads getting ready to handle the shift of Midwestern and East Coast container traffic, specifically citing the "unstable" labor relations on the West Coast, and implicitly blaming the ILWU. The shift of port, longshore, warehouse, and railroad jobs to the East Coast or Canada won't help the working class, won't help Oakland, won't help the 99%.
Remember, The Man loves it when us working people squabble over tactics, yell at each other, accuse each other of being sellouts or politically impure.
This is indeed a complex issue, and I respect those who examine it and feel they can't support the shutdown. But please don't cite the SF Chronicle as a source for news here - as shills for big corporations and businesses that support them, they have been anti-Occupy since day 1, giving little to no coverage unless it's negative (see Sunday's page 1 headline about shrinking support for the shutdown). Slanted coverage like "Occupy fails to connect with blacks" (they should have been there last night!) does the public a disservice. A city like SF deserves a paper that isn't the antithesis of progressivism. The ILWU and other unions cannot endorse a strike unless they're in contract negotiations, yet there was also support among individual ILWU and other union and non-union workers at the port. Conservatively, I'd estimate the extremely diverse crowd at the evening action to be around 10,000. The action was meant to stand in solidarity with the Longview workers, yes, but also to put a halt to the millions of dollars in profits that move thru that port every day, that ordinary citizens of Oakland do not share in. Please also see http://occupywallst.org/article/open-letter-americas-port-truck-drivers-occupy-por/
ReplyDelete