News / ILA VP Daggett rebuts claims US ports are 'inefficient', but hits out at low investment

© Prapawan Pipatwongsa

The window for front-loading cargo before a US port strike – or tariffs – is closing, shippers have been warned, while yesterday’s statement from the ILA suggests the union is continuing to hold fast on its position. 

Stung by recent criticism that US ports are inefficient, Dennis Daggett, the ILA’s EVP, issued a rebuttal based on “skewed” metrics.

Lambasting the media for “inaccurate reporting”, he wrote: “The claims are largely based on skewed interpretations of data that fail to account for the fundamental differences between US marine terminals and transhipment hubs in other parts of the world.” 

In the Container Port Performance Index for 2023, issued by the World Bank and S&P Global, US ports fared relatively badly, its top gateway, Charleston,  ranked 53rd. 

But Mr Daggett claimed: “These rankings heavily favour transhipment hubs, which are fundamentally different in operation from US ports. Transhipment ports primarily handle containers that are unloaded from one vessel and immediately loaded onto another, with minimal interaction with inland transportation systems or domestic cargo. In contrast, US ports are full-service gateways that handle a complex mix of imports and exports, integrating rail, trucking and warehousing, to deliver goods across a vast geography.

“Comparing these two types of facilities is like comparing apples to oranges.” 

However, top of that list for productivity is Yangshan, a highly automated non-transhipment port. In fact, Chinese ports, generally not transhipment-focused, feature high in the rankings. 

But Mr Daggett claimed the study relied on criteria like vessel turnaround times, which “inherently favour transhipment ports that focus exclusively on unloading and reloading”. 

However, one port expert told The Loadstar: “Chinese ports are very good at handling export volumes, which are a large part of their business and can be done efficiently. 

“But the same could be said of US ports, which can focus on imports. The problem in the US is things like the chassis system, the unions and the inability of the ports to expand, while there is crumbling infrastructure.”  

This is a point on which Mr Daggett agrees. He added: “What no one seems to be talking about is the outdated infrastructure that supports US ports, such as highways, bridges, rail systems, and dredging operations.

“Many of these critical connections to the ports are decades behind the needs of modern commerce. Trucks transporting goods often face bottlenecks on congested and deteriorating highways. Ageing rail systems struggle to keep up with the demands of intermodal transport. Dredging operations to accommodate larger vessels lag behind, forcing delays and inefficiencies. Is that the ILA’s fault, too?” 

Consultant Lars Jensen noted that the ILA rebuttal was “a scattershot attack on the efficiency measurements with cherry-picked examples taken out of context, but with no attempt of providing measurements based on their own view of how efficiency should be measured”. 

He added: “Curiously they promote the total volume handled by Los Angeles/Long Beach as examples of ports exceeding the operations of most transhipment hubs. Curious, as there are terminals in LA/LB which are using the kinds of automation that the ILA is fighting against.”

He concluded: “This is not about being “correct” in terms of analysis. This is about winning a negotiation where one of the tools is to secure political support.” 

Shippers, meanwhile, fear these types of negotiation tactics are not going to break the impasse. The US National Retail Federation and Hackett Associates have released a port tracker which predicts a surge in imports in the first quarter. 

Hackett Associates founder Ben Hackett said: “Prospects of reaching a quick agreement on the key sticking point of automation are not looking good.  

“The window to front-load goods on vessels arriving before a potential strike is quickly closing. Then there are issues as president-elect Trump promises to increase tariffs when he takes office. It is not clear whether this will actually take effect immediately or whether it will take time to implement the tariffs, but shippers are moving up as much cargo as they can before then.” 

NRF VP for supply chain and customs policy Jonathan Gold added: “Bringing in cargo early is a prudent step to mitigate the impact on our industry, consumers and the nation’s economy.

“We call on both parties at the ports to return to the table, get a deal done and avoid a strike. And we call on the incoming administration to use tariffs in a strategic manner, rather than a broad-based approach impacting every-day consumer goods.” 

The Loadstar will be launching a series on port automation next week.