Posted on 02/17/2006 3:43:01 PM PST by outofhere2
Savage jumped the shark.
I'm excerpting from FMC Commissioner from a speech he gave a few years ago. He gives reference to some of the history behind the anti-trust exemptions..
===
http://www.fmc.gov/speeches/newsrelease.asp?SPEECH_ID=44
In the most expansive version of my standard speech about the Ocean Shipping Reform Act of 1998, I trace the history
of the ocean carrier antitrust immunity all the way back to Alexander Committee investigation of 1913
Ocean carriers engaged in the United States international trade have been regulated since the early part of the last century. In 1994, Congress began to seriously consider revisions to the most recent version of the law providing for the oversight and regulation of international ocean liner shipping -- the Shipping Act of 1984. Following four years of review and deliberation, Congress passed and the President signed the Ocean Shipping Reform Act of 1998.
The Ocean Shipping Reform Act is not a total deregulation of the ocean transportation system. Congress preserved and reaffirmed the antitrust immunity for ocean carriers and retained some elements of tariff publication and the common carriage system
I elaborated upon the statement you quoted quite detailedly... which points do you disagree with?
Thanks for the clarification!
I worked as Import Freight supervisor for a major Asian-based Ocean Container Line... which means that in addition to babysitting the adult staff I had, I had to monitor the cargo once the Vessel arrived at port. Work with the Importer , US Customs, the Railroads, the Ports, the Trucks, sometimes the overseas Shipper, the Customs Broker, the Warehouse, the Notify Party etc.. just to get the container out of the port.
I also directly handled our US Customs/USDA/FDA Inspection process (basically ensuring that the Consignee understood his cargo was put on hold and that he contact the gov't to take care of it)
The thing is... the way it works at one port is pretty much the way it works at all US Ports.
And here's one rule:
US Customs calls the shots.
It's laughable to think that a port union worker would have any influence at all.
It's like saying the Court Reporter is going to get a jury to aquit you. They have absolutely no reason to interact.
Mark Foley of Florida is another opponent of this deal. He was responsible for killing the plan to drill off the shore of the continental US as well as ANWR. Has anyone thought that maybe he might have some undisclosed interest in killing this deal too?
Thanks for the info.
The cynical side of me says that these politicians are trying to kill the deal because they have another shipping conglomerate among their campaign contributors that wants to acquire P&O Ports for less than the $6.8 billion that the UAE company is offering.
I never thought I would hear Scummer on Savage it blew
me away, I thought Savage was going to have hilary on
there next.
The labor contracts aren't signed with the Port Operator of a dock.
So , again, you're wrong.
Labor on the East Coast is represented by the ILA. Management is represented by the USMX. That's it.. just those two parties.
Here's an article about the most recent contract.
ILA AND USMX PLEASED WITH NEW SIX-YEAR CONTRACT
The President of the International Longshoremen's Association, AFL-CIO (ILA), John Bowers, and the Chairman/CEO of the United States Maritime Alliance, Ltd. (USMX), James A. Capo, are pleased to announce that they have executed the Memorandum of Settlement for the new six year Master Contract, which was ratified by the ILA membership on June 8. The new contract, which had been previously ratified by the membership of USMX, becomes effective on Oct.1 and expires on Sept.30, 2010.
Mr. Bowers and Mr. Capo both praised the efforts of the labor and management negotiating committees that engaged in bargaining for more than one year before the contract was finally settled in March of 2004.
Both leaders cited the six year term of the agreement and the resultant labor stability as a strong indication of the continuing commitment of the ILA and USMX to the uninterrupted flow of commerce through the ports on the East and Gulf coasts.
While considered by some to be the costliest contract in the history of coastwide bargaining between the parties, the main provisions of the new agreement will help the ILA in dealing with both non-ILA and non-union competition up and down the coast.
The new agreement also provides for increased funding of ILA's national health care program, MILA, without which longshore workers and their families in some ports could have been facing a loss of healthcare benefits.
Mr. Bowers and Mr. Capo both expressed optimism that individual port negotiations on local conditions will be successfully concluded prior to the effective date of the new Master Agreement.
"Who runs the yard here is irrelevent."
Way off topic, but I caught a glimpse of the news on KING 5 in Seattle about gang tagging INSIDE the cargo bays of some Alaska Airlines planes. The gang "experts" looked at the graffitti and said it is from some dangerous gang from California.
The airport people pretty much dismissed the gang experts saying "they don't know how airports are run, there's no concern".
Well, as a lay person - I'm concerned! Get some al' Queda illegals mixed in with the gangs - not sure I want them having access to the holds of airliners. Even if they are searched at the last minute, etc.
I dont see how these two things relate.. so instead of using analogy why dont you just say what exactly are you concerned about that you think might happen ?
I guess I'm wondering who is actually "running the yard" at Seattle's (or other) airports, and are they doing a good enough job.
We've had several mishaps lately such as a baggage handler putting a nick in an airplane (Alaska Air) that blew out and forced to make an emergency landing. Had a roll-over with a baggage cart and some other things. I seem to recall that those folks are under contract to the individual airlines.
Granted, accidents happen, but it seemed to have a lot to do with new people (non-union I believe?) doing the work.
And now this report of dangerous gang tagging inside the holds.
My concern is not just how well are these new people trained, but what type of security checks do they go through, etc. And it makes me wonder when the people running the place dismiss the cop's concern with an arrogant "they don't know how airports work".
I have no idea what "exactly" I'm concerned about. But I guess it would be along the lines of terrorists offering gangs lots of money, drugs, and weapons if they help get something (bombs, guns, boxcutters etc.) on the airline.
You sound like you know the ins and outs of cargo handling, so perhaps some gang member tagging the hold is of no concern due to all the security checks, etc. Still don't like the idea of it.
I agree,this story got very little attention on FR a few days ago much to my surprise.
This is a real winner for the DEMS and I support and of their efforts to stop this insane plan to give any control to an ARAB state for our ports.
Bush is wrong on this one and I hope GOP and DEMS work to defeat this deal and stop it.
Yawn, actually the opposite is true, Savage frequently offers solutions to problems, and he in fact helps solve some of our country's problems. If I didn't feel it would be a total waste of my time I'd make the list right now. But I recognize that it's impossible for the bushbots to really hear the man because he occassionally disagrees with President Bush.
No matter how you slice it, hiring Arab Muslims from the middle east to control the security of our Eastern sea ports is absolutely STUPID.
Which of our country's problems has Michael Savage solved?
That's really funny. They inspect between 1% - 5% of packages entering the U.S. But I think I understand President Bush's 'brilliant' idea, these Arab Muslims he's importing from the middle east to help with U.S. port security are "just doing jobs that Americans won't do".
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.