George Bush GOT IT RIGHT this time: Bush directed the U.S. Justice Department (news - web sites) to seek the court order under the 1947 Taft-Hartley Act because of the potential for the port closure to have "a crippling effect on the national economy."
Check it out It's true...President Bush Wins End to West Coast Lockout
Tue Oct 8,10:45 PM ET
By Andrew Quinn
SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - President Bush (news - web sites) won an 80-day halt to a management lockout of West Coast ports on Tuesday as a federal judge granted a court order to reopen the docks and start clearing a huge backlog of cargo from more than 200 ships now idled offshore.
The Pacific Maritime Association, which represents port employers, said the 29 ports could be reopened as early as Wednesday afternoon as 10,500 union longshoremen return to work under the government's order.
In San Francisco, U.S. District Court Judge William Alsup said the government had met the requirements for an injunction to reopen the ports and issued a temporary restraining order with a fuller hearing set for Oct. 16.
"The court finds the statutory requirements are met," Alsup said, rejecting arguments by the International Longshore and Warehouse Union that the Bush Administration and port employers were in collusion and there was no need for an injunction.
Bush directed the U.S. Justice Department (news - web sites) to seek the court order under the 1947 Taft-Hartley Act because of the potential for the port closure to have "a crippling effect on the national economy."
The action marked the first time in 24 years that a president invoked the act, and came despite administration fears of an organized labor backlash weeks before an election that will determine which party controls the U.S. Congress.
The last time a president intervened in a dock dispute was in 1971 when Richard Nixon invoked the Taft Hartley Act to end an ILWU dock strike.
ILWU President James Spinosa said the union would follow a court order "as best we can," but said with a backup of cargo his members would "work safe" -- a possible suggestion work slowdowns could continue.
That, however, would put the union in danger of a contempt of court citation. Under Alsup's order, both sides are required to keep port operations at a "normal and reasonable" rate, although Alsup declined to say who would be determine whether this condition was being met.
"We will cross that bridge when we get there," he said.
The dispute between the union and the PMA centers on both the introduction of new port technology and union control over jobs it might create.
THREAT TO NATIONAL SECURITY
Deputy Assistant U.S. Attorney General Shannen Coffin outlined the government's case to Alsup, declaring that the lockout was damaging the economy and undercutting national security as the United States wages its global assault on terror and prepares for possible action against Iraq.
"Work stoppages at West Coast ports will potentially cripple military readiness," Coffin said.
The PMA, which locked the ILWU off the docks on Sept. 29 after accusing the 10,500-member union of staging illegal work slowdowns, said it had "no principled objections" to the government's request to invoke Taft-Hartley, which will require the union to work according to the terms of the collective bargaining agreement that expired on July 1.
Robert Remar, representing the ILWU, urged the judge to reject the government's request, which he said was the result of "collusion" between the PMA and the federal government aimed at weakening union control over the docks.
"This is some nice, well-crafted mousetrap that has been set," Remar said, detailing what he said were a series of communications between federal officials and the PMA as port employers engaged in contract negotiations with the union.
Alsup disagreed, and said he saw no evidence to back up the union's contention that the lockout was "collapsing" on its own as the PMA allowed ILWU longshoremen to load ships for Alaska and Hawaii under interim agreements designed to spare those states undue economic hardship.
"The bay is full of loaded ships and the docks are rotting with perishables," Alsup said. "It's just not true that this lockout has collapsed."
Alsup's temporary restraining order is the prelude to a full injunction that would suspend the lockout for 80 days. If the dispute is not settled after 60, the Taft-Hartley Act requires a secret ballot vote by the workers on the employers' final offer. If that is rejected, the lockout could resume.
UNIONS OBJECT
Unions object to Bush's action because it could reduce pressure on port employers to agree to a new contract. The president has been trying to chip away at traditional labor support for Democrats.
Lawyers representing the AFL-CIO filed a brief supporting the longshoremen on Tuesday, arguing that the government was undercutting labor's right to collective bargaining.
"We've got a new dock boss down here and his name is George Bush," Richard Mead, president of ILWU Local 10, said after the court ruling. "We have been locked out, not knocked out."
Bush's action came after he received the report of a fact-finding panel he established a day earlier. The report said the atmosphere for negotiations had been poisoned and the workers and employers were unlikely to resolve the dispute.
A last minute White House attempt to avert the order by persuading both sides to go back to work for 30 days under the old contract fell apart when port employers rejected the idea.
The lockout of ports handling $300 billion a year in trade had raised widespread fears of new disruptions in the faltering U.S. economy. Some 200 ships carrying food, manufacturing equipment and retail goods sit idle off the U.S. West Coast.
PMA officials said that it following the court order work could resume on the docks as early as Wednesday afternoon, although full operations were not likely to begin until the evening or the following day. |
