Quote:

---

At Occupy Wall Street on Friday, 10/28/11, Jack Heyman announces the solidarity of the International Longshore & Warehouse Union with the Occupy Oakland's call for a General Strike on November 2 in response to the police violence against protesters in Oakland.

---

Quote:

---

The writer is an ILWU Local 10 Executive Board member. The article was written on Nov. 8.
.....
The eyes of the world were on the city of Oakland and the massive people’s march to the nation’s fifth-largest container port on Nov. 2 for the General Strike and Day of Mass Action called by Occupy Oakland.
.....
The rank and file of labor is ready to take militant action at the point of production or service. SEIU Local 1021 was able to get their city workers the day off to either participate in the “stop work” action or not to be required to come to work for health and safety reasons.
.....
The Port of Oakland’s last two shutdowns came as the result of Local 10 members taking solidarity action. The first was the Justice for Oscar Grant — “Stop Police Brutality, Jail Killer Cops” — action, where longshore workers closed five Bay Area ports on Oct. 23, 2010.

The second Port of Oakland shutdown was the April 4, 2011, voluntary rank-and-file action to shut down the Port of Oakland for 24 hours on the anniversary of the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. in solidarity with the Wisconsin public sector workers’ fight for collective bargaining.

The importance of the Port of Oakland shutdown was that it linked up labor, the community and Occupy Oakland in a strategic action at the point of production. The labor movement must take a leading role in building a broad-based, working-class movement that challenges corporate rule and power by putting forward a people’s agenda. http://www.workers.org/2011/us/longshore_workers_1124/ they had no problem supporting Occupy's last port shutdown...wonder what changed their minds? Given unions have joined/supported Occupy extensively in recent times, seems strange...maybe it's because of the violence against protesters last port shutdown...or maybe someone got to them.

Quote:

---

The following solidarity statement was written by Clarence Thomas, International Longshore Workers Union Local 10 member, for the People’s Assembly meeting held at Hostos Community College in the Bronx, N.Y., on Nov. 5.

Greetings and solidarity,

I am exhilarated from the recent historical events here in Oakland.

In my opinion this has been one of the strongest examples of the power of the people in the U.S. and the 21st century. It is difficult to imagine that in one week’s time a call for a general strike — A Day of Action by the Occupy Oakland General Assembly — could have generated the overwhelming response from the people of Oakland.

They say a picture is worth a thousand words and most certainly the thousands that marched through the fifth largest port speak volumes while … organized labor, which only makes up 7.2 percent of the private sector workers, has been incapable of calling for a general strike in response to the unrelenting war on the working class by the ruling class. It is indeed remarkable how rank-and-file union members in the city of Oakland responded so positively to the call.
The city administrator of Oakland, on Oct. 28, 2011, issued a statement that SEIU Local 1021 had been authorized to utilize various types of leave in order to participate in the stop work action on Nov. 2. This offer was extended to other city workers. It’s an example of how this call made by the General ­Assembly of Occupy Oakland Movement resonated with workers in the city of Oakland.

Although Nov. 2 fell short of being a full general strike in the truest sense of the word — the city of Oakland and the fifth largest port in the U.S. were SHUT DOWN! Only essential services continued to be provided.

In conclusion, I hope that the action of the ­Occupy Oakland movement can be duplicated in cities around the country and that issues such as jobs and the Occupy 4 Jobs movement can be put front and center at the Occupy movement. http://www.workers.org/2011/us/clarence_thomas_1117/]

Quote:

---

Organized labor appears divided over the port shutdown effort.

The Nov. 2 strike that culminated in the port's closure had strong union support. This time, the city's teachers union is backing Monday's action while construction workers opposed to the closure say the port has provided jobs to many unemployed workers and apprentices.
.....

The union's president suggested in a letter to members that protesters were attempting to co-opt the union's cause to advance their own. http://www.timesunion.com/news/article/Protesters-block-some-gates-at-
western-US-ports-2396717.php the longshoremen have changed their minds (or just their tune?) in recent weeks...

Quote:

---

Organized labor appears divided over the port shutdown effort.

The Nov. 2 strike that culminated in the port's closure had strong union support. This time, the city's teachers union is backing Monday's action while construction workers opposed to the closure say the port has provided jobs to many unemployed workers and apprentices.
.....

The union's president suggested in a letter to members that protesters were attempting to co-opt the union's cause to advance their own. http://www.timesunion.com/news/article/Protesters-block-some-gates-at-
western-US-ports-2396717.php] Given it's the "president" of the union and he's telling his members that Occupy might "co-opt" their cause, makes me wonder. Do the union's PTB feel their power might be threatened or something, given their members supported the last port shutdown?

"Verrrrrry interesting"...

Any ideas on why they changed their minds? Loss of revenue/worker pay? Or something to do with those at the top of the unions? Or something eles? I'm asking YOU, and our intelligent posters, but I can all but quote what I'll get from some others...something about "bums" and "druggies" and "wanting handouts" and, and, and...

But for those who can use their brains, not just their partisanship, any ideas why they were SO pro-Occupy before and are now asking for hands off? I'm not well versed in union politics, etc., so I can't speak to why.

P.S. I love your new sig! Makes me smile...sadly...

Quote:

---

Any action on behalf of longshoremen now should also be led by the workers themselves, the union's current president said.

"Support is one thing, organization from outside groups attempting to co-opt our struggle in order to advance a broader agenda is quite another," Robert McEllrath wrote in a Dec. 6 letter to ILWU locals.

The key issue for targeting the ports is a longstanding dispute between longshoremen and grain exporter EGT at the Port of Longview along the Columbia River in Washington. The protesters say companies such as EGT represent "Wall Street on the waterfront" and believe rank-and-file longshoremen support the shutdown, regardless of what union leaders say. http://www.stltoday.com/news/national/occupiers-hope-to-close-ports-in
clude-longshoremen/article_890da9ac-73bd-5d1e-b7ee-744c5cae2e4a.html] and

Quote:

---

The protests were not endorsed by the International Longshore and Warehouse Union or the other major unions operating at the ports. A spokesman for ILWU, Craig Merrilees, said the union has specific rules about when it can agree to support a protest. "This was not a picket line under the legal terms of the current labor agreement," he said.

Still, the union's president said dockworkers agreed with the goals of the Occupy protesters, who assert that the economic system benefits the richest 1% of Americans at the cost of the other 99%.

"Most of us are tired of seeing a handful of the richest corporations and executives behave as though they're entitled to live like kings at everyone's expense," ILWU President Robert McEllrath said in a statement. More at http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2011/12/occupy-port-protests-doc
kworkers-unions.html they supported the first OWS protest, I think there's more to it than what they're saying. Whether they thought about this "specific rules" thing or are just using it as an excuse, who knows? But that answers why the headlines that the unions didn't support it. Oh, and where you read that 150 workers weren't called in to work their shift because of the action?--in actuality, 150 of 200 workers CHOSE not to come in; the other explanation is spin. Will try to find the interview I saw last night.

Found this interesting, from one member of the rank and file:

Quote:

---

This action is not only supported, however, by the Occupy movement. As I reported on my last post on the shutdown, port workers have been in meetings discussing the action and have spoken privately about their support. Many are unwilling to make statements to the press because they don't want to jeopardize their contracts, however, I sat down with one port worker to get his opinion on the action on condition of anonymity.

The longshoreman, who I will refer to as "John", also supports the Occupy movement and he spoke with me at length about the many reasons he is glad to see civil disobedience in the ports.

Quote:

---

I fully support it. The major shipping companies and other corporations that work with them don't just directly affect port workers, but the power they wield over the economy, politics and society as a whole effects all workers on an international scale. The labor and Occupy movements need to take the fight directly to their doorstep.

I had concerns even before Oakland called the November 2nd General Strike and 12/12 shutdown was that there wouldn't be enough dialogue between organizers, port workers and the unions that represent them. As such, we've seen something of a backlash specifically from ILWU officers which I think could have been avoided if there had been more discussion from the start.

---

Of course, the ILWU's objection to the action is that it would negatively effect port workers on the job to interrupt business at the ports. When I asked John about that concern, he told me:

Quote:

---

I think it's a valid concern, but if you want to make an omelet you gotta break some eggs. When workers themselves go on strike we discuss these issues. However, this is only a one-day thing. I think that these objections come up because the action was proposed by a seemingly outside group. However, port workers are members of the 99% percent as well! "An injury to one is an injury to all." We are all in this together.

---

Finally I asked him if other longshoremen supported the action and he grinned and said:

Quote:

---

Yes, absolutely. Longshoremen have a long proud history of radical activism and honoring community picket lines, much like the anti-apartheid pickets at ports in the 1980s.

---

It appears that that history of radical activism is still taking place today, and with longshoremen supporting the action, organizers and Occupiers are more dedicated than ever to sending a message to the large corporations that operate in ports cannot engage in union-busting tactics without the community taking them to task. http://oneangryqueer.blogspot.com/2011/12/longshoreman-speaks-i-fully-
support.html found one article very illuminating. I learned a lot from this "Open Letter from America’s Port Truck Drivers on Occupy the Ports" which I never knew before.

Quote:

---

We are the front-line workers who haul container rigs full of imported and exported goods to and from the docks and warehouses every day.

We have been elected by committees of our co-workers at the Ports of Los Angeles, Long Beach, Oakland, Seattle, Tacoma, New York and New Jersey to tell our collective story. We have accepted the honor to speak up for our brothers and sisters about our working conditions despite the risk of retaliation we face. One of us is a mother, the rest of us fathers. Between the five of us we have 11children and one more baby on the way. We have a combined 46 years of experience driving cargo from our shores for America’s stores.

We are inspired that a non-violent democratic movement that insists on basic economic fairness is capturing the hearts and minds of so many working people. Thank you “99 Percenters” for hearing our call for justice. We are humbled and overwhelmed by recent attention. Normally we are invisible.

Today’s demonstrations will impact us. While we cannot officially speak for every worker who shares our occupation, we can use this opportunity to reveal what it’s like to walk a day in our shoes for the 110,000 of us in America whose job it is to be a port truck driver. It may be tempting for media to ask questions about whether we support a shutdown, but there are no easy answers. Instead, we ask you, are you willing to listen and learn why a one-word response is impossible?

We love being behind the wheel. We are proud of the work we do to keep America’s economy moving. But we feel humiliated when we receive paychecks that suggest we work part time at a fast-food counter. Especially when we work an average of 60 or more hours a week, away from our families.

There is so much at stake in our industry. It is one of the nation’s most dangerous occupations. We don’t think truck driving should be a dead-end road in America. It should be a good job with a middle-class paycheck like it used to be decades ago.

We desperately want to drive clean and safe vehicles. Rigs that do not fill our lungs with deadly toxins, or dirty the air in the communities we haul in.

Poverty and pollution are like a plague at the ports. Our economic conditions are what led to the environmental crisis.

You, the public, have paid a severe price along with us.

Why? Just like Wall Street doesn’t have to abide by rules, our industry isn’t bound to regulation. So the market is run by con artists. The companies we work for call us independent contractors, as if we were our own bosses, but they boss us around. We receive Third World wages and drive sweatshops on wheels. We cannot negotiate our rates. (Usually we are not allowed to even see them.) We are paid by the load, not by the hour. So when we sit in those long lines at the terminals, or if we are stuck in traffic, we become volunteers who basically donate our time to the trucking and shipping companies. That’s the nice way to put it. We have all heard the words “modern-day slaves” at the lunch stops.

There are no restrooms for drivers. We keep empty bottles in our cabs. Plastic bags too. We feel like dogs. An Oakland driver was recently banned from the terminal because he was spied relieving himself behind a container. Neither the port, nor the terminal operators or anyone in the industry thinks it is their responsibility to provide humane and hygienic facilities for us. It is absolutely horrible for drivers who are women, who risk infection when they try to hold it until they can find a place to go.

The companies demand we cut corners to compete. It makes our roads less safe. When we try to blow the whistle about skipped inspections, faulty equipment, or falsified logs, then we are “starved out.” That means we are either fired outright, or more likely, we never get dispatched to haul a load again.

It may be difficult to comprehend the complex issues and nature of our employment. For us too. When businesses disguise workers like us as contractors, the Department of Labor calls it misclassification. We call it illegal. Those who profit from global trade and goods movement are getting away with it because everyone is doing it. One journalist took the time to talk to us this week and she explains it very well to outsiders. We hope you will read the enclosed article “How Goldman Sachs and Other Companies Exploit Port Truck Drivers.”

But the short answer to the question: Why are companies like SSA Marine, the Seattle-based global terminal operator that runs one of the West Coast’s major trucking carriers, Shippers’ Transport Express, doing this? Why would mega-rich Maersk, a huge Danish shipping and trucking conglomerate that wants to drill for more oil with Exxon Mobil in the Gulf Coast conduct business this way too?

To cheat on taxes, drive down business costs, and deny us the right to belong to a union, that’s why.

The typical arrangement works like this: Everything comes out of our pockets or is deducted from our paychecks. The truck or lease, fuel, insurance, registration, you name it. Our employers do not have to pay the costs of meeting emissions-compliant regulations; that is our financial burden to bear. Clean trucks cost about four to five times more than what we take home in a year. A few of us haul our company’s trucks for a tiny fraction of what the shippers pay per load instead of an hourly wage. They still call us independent owner-operators and give us a 1099 rather than a W-2.

We have never recovered from losing our basic rights as employees in America. Every year it literally goes from bad to worse to the unimaginable. We were ground zero for the government’s first major experiment into letting big business call the shots. Since it worked so well for the CEOs in transportation, why not the mortgage and banking industry too?

Even the few of us who are hired as legitimate employees are routinely denied our legal rights under this system. Just ask our co-workers who haul clothing brands like Guess?, Under Armour, and Ralph Lauren’s Polo. The carrier they work for in Los Angeles is called Toll Group and is headquartered in Australia. At the busiest time of the holiday shopping season, 26 drivers were axed after wearing Teamster T-shirts to work. They were protesting the lack of access to clean, indoor restrooms with running water. The company hired an anti-union consultant to intimidate the drivers. Down Under, the same company bargains with 12,000 of our counterparts in good faith.

Despite our great hardships, many of us cannot — or refuse to, as some of the most well-intentioned suggest — “just quit.” First, we want to work and do not have a safety net. Many of us are tied to one-sided leases. But more importantly, why should we have to leave? Truck driving is what we do, and we do it well.

We are the skilled, specially-licensed professionals who guarantee that Target, Best Buy, and Wal-Mart are all stocked with just-in-time delivery for consumers. Take a look at all the stuff in your house. The things you see advertised on TV. Chances are a port truck driver brought that special holiday gift to the store you bought it.

We would rather stick together and transform our industry from within. We deserve to be fairly rewarded and valued. That is why we have united to stage convoys, park our trucks, marched on the boss, and even shut down these ports.

It’s like our hero Dutch Prior, a Shipper’s/SSA Marine driver, told CBS Early Morning this month: “If you don’t stand for something, you’ll fall for anything.”

The more underwater we are, the more our restlessness grows. We are being thoughtful about how best to organize ourselves and do what is needed to win dignity, respect, and justice.

Nowadays greedy corporations are treated as “people” while the politicians they bankroll cast union members who try to improve their workplaces as “thugs.”

But we believe in the power and potential behind a truly united 99%. We admire the strength and perseverance of the longshoremen. We are fighting like mad to overcome our exploitation, so please, stick by us long after December 12. Our friends in the Coalition for Clean & Safe Ports created a pledge you can sign to support us here.

We drivers have a saying, “We may not have a union yet, but no one can stop us from acting like one.”

The brothers and sisters of the Teamsters have our backs. They help us make our voices heard. But we need your help too so we can achieve the day where we raise our fists and together declare: “No one could stop us from forming a union.”

Thank you.

In solidarity,

Leonardo Mejia
SSA Marine/Shippers Transport Express
Port of Long Beach
10-year driver

Yemane Berhane
Ports of Seattle & Tacoma
6-year port driver

Xiomara Perez
Toll Group
Port of Los Angeles
8-year driver

Abdul Khan
Port of Oakland
7-year port driver

Ramiro Gotay
Ports of New York & New Jersey
15-year port driver
http://cleanandsafeports.org/blog/2011/12/12/an-open-letter-from-ameri
ca%E2%80%99s-port-truck-drivers-on-occupy-the-ports/ was from Long Beach.

Here's some further information about WHY the mixed message at 3:20ish; and more at 5:00ish as to why the union leaders were against it. it's real long and I didn't intend to get through the hole thing, but I found it so interesting and ended up watching the whole 13 minutes. I learned a lot, about history and from the working-person's view:

He makes a really illuminating statement about the history of crossing picket lines at 5:40 and how it affected African Americans and kind of changed history. At 6:40 he's asked why they'd support this action when Oakland has such high unemployment, and why shut down the ports which are employing people. In essence: It's a mixed bag, and why all we hear from the MSM is that labor "is against" the port closure. I THINK this gives a clue as to why the leaders were against it, and it's interesting to me how well the "media blitz" he mentions worked. "How can you vote Democrat or Republican and both are beholden to a corporation?" "Democracy is more than just voting. Democracy is exercising your right as a citizen. I'm seeing harsh criticizm coming from the right, and very harsh criticizm from the left. It seems to it's not about whether you're left or right now; it's whether you're corporate-owned and corporate-bought, versus are you free and able to (?) with the people." "Some would say the Republican party represents the extreme right and the Democratic party represents the right because we haven't seen anything progressive coming from the Democratics in a number of years." He blames the workers partly for not being in motion.

This has been educating, for me. And hopefully answers the questions posed.