Port Automation Series The big question: what is the future for the global port labour force?

ID 339006241 © William Morgan | Dreamstime.com

There was brief period of hope for US importers in early October, after a three-day stoppage in US east and Gulf coast ports came to an end thanks to a “tentative agreement” on renumeration.

Any prospect that that optimism would lead to a comprehensive new master contract being signed by US east and Gulf coast port employer body USMX and the ILA dockworker union were dashed, after it became clear that the fundamental hurdle to any agreement remained the issues of port automation.

The prospects for longer-term strike action following next month’s 15 January deadline were considerably shortened after president-elect Trump weighed in on the side of the ILA.

“The amount of money saved [by automation] is nowhere near the distress, hurt and harm it causes American workers, in this case, our longshoremen,” Mr Trump said following a meeting with Harold Daggett, ILA chair.

Adding: “I’d rather these foreign companies spend it on the great men and women on our docks than machinery, which is expensive, and which will constantly have to be replaced.”

The issue of port automation and its relationship with the existing labour force has been ever-present in the industry for around three decades, and in a variety of jurisdictions, but none have posed quite the same impact on global supply chains, nor so starkly illustrated the question for those on both sides of the divide: what is the future for the global port labour force?

“There’s no romance in working in a port these days,” one European terminal executive told The Loadstar. “It’s not like there are smells of spices from far-off, exotic places – it’s just stacks of containers. It’s a demanding job, it’s mostly outside and it’s generally uncomfortable.

“It is well-paid, if you’ve left school with minimum qualifications, but for many positions, such as driving terminal tractors, it is also relatively straightforward to automate,” he adds.

However, that presumes the technology works, that the systems are more effective and that more jobs will not only be created, but created in a way that the dockers can step into.

Asked not only if port automation does improve efficiency, but to provide specifics, HHLA, operator of three of the port of Hamburg’s terminals, told The Loadstar: “Automation does not simply mean replacing existing jobs with automation.”

Rather, a spokesperson explained: “Jobs will change as a result, and our goal is to combine human expertise with automation to ensure a high level of resilience in operation”.

USMX attempted something approaching specificity when it claimed that “modern crane technology” had not only doubled container capacity but added 600-1,200 jobs at an unspecified east coast terminal – a lack of detail that only served to sharpen the cynicism of labour representatives.

And the International Transport Workers’ Federation (ITF) heavily doubts the veracity of the port operators’ position. On the topic of retraining, the ITF answer is unequivocal – “this is a bluff”.

And the idea that it won’t result in lost jobs? “Automation does eliminate jobs, between 50% to 80%, depending on the type and extent of the automation, and while some workers can be re-trained to do other work, overall net jobs will decrease,” a representative told The Loadstar.

This argument seems to be supported by analysis from the World Economic Forum (WEF).

Citing an Economic Roundtable report from 2022, WEF warned that automating ports needed to heed the example of two terminals at the ports of Long Beach and LA, which saw 572 full-time roles lost to the technology.

Closing its argument, the ITF spokesperson put it bluntly: “Automation mostly has a negative impact on efficiency and productivity.”

But could the ITF provide a more concrete example, than just the other side of an equation?

“It was seen in the abandoned automation project at the port of Auckland, New Zealand.”