[plain talk]

“the ILA said that it is “steadfastly against any form of automation – full or semi – that replaces jobs or historical work functions. We will not accept the loss of work and livelihood for our members due to automation.””

Good luck with that.

[Phlyer]

Good luck with that ["We will not accept . . . automation."].

The theme of the parent article is correct. Automation does not hurt wages. It does, however, reduce the number of jobs in the union.

However, in the longer term the *only* way to keep jobs in the union is for the union to be so productive that alternative approaches cannot compete. And refusing to accept automation will kill productivity.

So, it will take something like luck to sustain union jobs while refusing automation - because the economics will not.

[Drew68]

“the ILA said that it is “steadfastly against any form of automation – full or semi – that replaces jobs or historical work functions.

The ILA's mobster president had a fit when EZ-Pass replaced tollbooth workers.

Eff that guy. Seriously.

[Harmless Teddy Bear]

They probably want to get rid of CONEXs as well.

[Clutch Martin]

“the ILA said that it is “steadfastly against any form of automation – full or semi – that replaces jobs or historical work functions. We will not accept the loss of work and livelihood for our members due to automation.”

The “bossman” is a dinosaur... IOW, the union is hearkening back to the days of bale hooks and cargo nets... this ain’t “On The Waterfront” anymore...