ILWU WARRIOR
AN INJURY TO ONE IS AN INJURY TO ALL
SUPPLEMENTAL WASHINGTON REPORT
LINDSAY MCLAUGHLIN, LEGISLATIVE DIRECTOR
BRIAN DAVIDSON, LEGISLATIVE ASSISTANT
VOLUME 5, NUMBER 4
June 8, 2004
The Drafting Committee for the platform of the Democratic Party held a hearing on May 22, 2004 in Portland Oregon. The subject was Homeland Security. Representative Earl Blumenauer (D-OR) placed a call to Coast Legislative Committee member Dawn DesBrisay (Oregon) and asked for the ILWU’s participation. This can be taken as a sign that the Democratic Party understands that the ILWU is on the frontline of maritime security and has important insights and expertise in the area. The International Titled Officers chose Leal A. Sundet (Local 8), Columbia River Port Security point person, to represent the Union. Shortly after Sundet’s testimony, DesBrisay heard a speech by Democratic Presidential candidate John Kerry, in which he stated that containers ought to be inspected to ensure the safety of our country and the men and women who work on the docks. We are having a positive impact.
Comments by Leal A Sundet
I appreciate the opportunity to offer my views to you today. I am humbled that the DNC has sought my views in the writing of what may indeed be the most important Democratic platform in decades. The fact that workers’ opinions are sought is what distinguishes the Democratic Party from the Republican Party. Workers have a distinguished seat at the table in our party, while the Republican Party views workers as little more than chattel necessary to enhance corporate profit.
That mentality is driving the Bush Administration relative to Port Security. The rhetoric is there. The substance is not.
From a dock workers’ perspective, Port Security equates to worker safety. In the event of a terrorist incident, it is the dock worker that will be killed or injured.
As the Bush Administration continues to infuriate the World community with its’ unilateralism and arrogant foreign policy, the United States faces more and more potential enemies willing to lash out from frustration. The dock worker who has no control over such policy, may be the first to suffer from any reaction. As such, protection is demanded. That protection, however, is not being provided. It is not being provided because the Bush Administration is placing corporate profits over workplace safety.
The U.S. Congress passed the Maritime Transportation Security Act (MTSA), which requires that the Nation’s marine terminals restrict access and incorporate cargo integrity measures.
Today, dock workers are being scrutinized, but literally no one else is. At Portland’s Terminal 6 Container Terminal approximately 700 containers are received daily. Truck drivers, most of whom are paid piecemeal, and are considered independent contractors, enter and leave the terminal with no or minimum scrutiny. These truck drivers, working for very low wages, are made up of a multitude of cultures. Many of them are new immigrants and are not U.S. citizens.
In many cases, the trucks carry passengers, such as wives, girlfriends, children, or friends. All freely enter the terminal. The Bush Administration has done nothing to identify truck drivers, and by virtue of any identification process, restrict access. If I were a terrorist and sought access to a terminal, I would get a job as a truck driver for some fly-by-night truck company desperate for a driver, who is willing to work for the starvation wages that are the Industry norm.
While it is recognized that the shipping container itself is the most obvious method to transport a bomb, or terrorists themselves, scrutiny of containers is not even being done in keeping with the MTSA. The MTSA requires that both import and export container seals be checked for integrity of the seal. To save money, the West Coast Terminal Operators have eliminated what has been routine procedure to physically check seals. Even with reported complaints to Homeland Security officials, there is no political will to enforce the Bush Administration’s own regulations.
On any given day in Portland, 5 of 700 inbound loaded containers do not have seals that match documentation or have seals at all. This implies that the container has been tampered with before reaching the terminal. The current procedure is simply to document the actual seal number or place a new seal on the container. Customs or the Coast Guard is not notified. The IlWU met with Customs and suggested that a procedure be established whereby Customs would be notified and would decide if it was necessary to open the container for inspection. Customs told us they were not interested in making any changes in the current procedure.
It is not uncommon for containers to enter the terminal with no accompanying documentation as to it’s’ origin or contents. Such a container is commonly received and stored awaiting its documentation. The Terminal does not want to inconvenience a customer and the Bush Administration does not want to restrict commerce even the slightest. The worker is forced to work around potential bombs.
In April, 2004, a container exploded on a terminal in Los Angeles. While the explosion was not considered a terrorist incident, it did demonstrate a breach in security. The container’s documentation listed its contents vaguely as “freight of all kind” or FAK. Inside, to nobody’s knowledge, were a number of full propane bottles. The bottles exploded. The container was destined to be stowed on the ship, under deck, below a hazard designated container. Had it exploded there, and depending on the contents of the hazard designated container, significant damage and loss of life may have resulted. The Bush Administration has banned the “FAK” designation for import containers, but refuses to do so for export containers, presumably because it may inconvenience a domestic company.
On March 14, 2004, ten (10) dock workers were killed in an Israeli port by suicide bombers smuggled onto the terminal in a container.
There is no scrutiny of containers that enter the terminal by rail. Containers on railcars are often stored on side tracks in low inhabited areas, for days, without guard, and are finally brought onto the terminal without any oversight. Terrorists can position themselves on the rail cars or in containers and no one would know. Bombs could be placed and no one would know. There is no political will by the Bush Administration to change the practice.
Last month, Tom Ridge came to Portland and used the backdrop of working container cranes to give a speech to Homeland Security employees, Industry representatives and local government officials. The essence of his speech was that the U.S. Government did not have the resources to fund the security improvements necessary for full MTSA compliance and that the Industry would be expected to pick up a large part of the tab. To the dock worker, that means working conditions and wages will be squeezed to maintain corporate profits. Because of ill advised Government foreign policy decisions, dock worker safety is threatened, but the necessary protections ultimately will come out of the pockets of the worker and their surrendering of personal liberties. Meaningful security around cargo identification and container tampering will not even be undertaken.
Approximately two years ago Nike representatives testified at a Portland Senatorial Hearing involving Senators Wyden and Smith that the prevention of theft of their products was of greater or equal importance to seaport security generally. That statement was made in light of a Bush Administration initiative to require that containers be dock stored at overseas terminals 72 hours prior to loading on a vessel. Nike, who manufacturers shoes in Malaysia, a hot spot for alleged terrorist activity, could not protect the contents of its containers from theft on the dock. To prevent theft the Company moved containers directly from its manufacturing facility to the vessel for loading.
Industry mentality that any inconvenience in commerce, no matter how minor, out-weighs the need to protect dock workers and the communities around terminals is mirrored by the Bush Administration. Rhetoric is one thing, implementation is another.
TSA grants money for Port Security enhancements. By policy, the money cannot be used for personnel even though the addition of security personnel is often the best way to protect perimeters. TSA money is granted based in large part on cronyism. There is no objective criterion that has been shared with the Public as to how the money is distributed.
The Port of Portland, currently led by the past Chief of Staff to a Democratic Governor, has received one grant out of three requests, while a group that largely lobbies on behalf of the steamship community, led by a retired past Coast Guard Port Captain, has received two grants in the last three requests.
The ILWU has consistently pressed that empty containers entering the terminal is one of most serious threats to security. These containers are not scrutinized at all. The ILWU’s proposal to inspect the interior of empties or simply to place seals on them and verify the seal’s integrity upon terminal entry has been regularly rejected by the Bush Administration.
The ILWU has proposed that in the event that a significant terrorist incident disables a major port, a contingency plan should be developed to shift operations to smaller ports that have underutilized facilities. Such a plan may require government expenditure for capital equipment that can be put into place for potential usage. Industry and the free market system cannot be expected to shoulder such a burden. The Bush Administration remains uninterested in our proposal.
While I could go on for some time, I will stop here given my time constraints. I look forward to any questions you may have. Again, thank you for inviting me and for listening. I hope my comments will help in formulating what will be a platform that the American people will enthusiastically endorse and that the next President, John Kerry, will use to guide our great Country back to respectability.
bdopeiu29
