Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: standingfirm

I had thought the deal involved taking over contracts for management of the ports. But on Rush this morning, the discussion indicated actual ownership of significant port facilities is involved.


190 posted on 02/20/2006 1:15:53 PM PST by n-tres-ted (Remember November!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 168 | View Replies ]


To: n-tres-ted

This ownership does not imply authority over cargo screening, nor does it imply that it controls labor.

Most of the container ports on the East Coast and Gulf are ultimately managed by USMX. USMX has one contract with the ILA dock union that covers the enter area of coverage.

The function of the Port Operator is to be the coordinator between the Shipping Lines and the Union providing the labor.

The Shipping Lines tell the Port Operator which ships are coming and the amount of containers that need to be handled and how many "gangs" of labor they need. The Port Operator tells the Union there x number of people for how ever number of gangs will be needed for any shift. The dock worker goes to the Union dispatch hall and gets his assignment.

It's not like a Port Operator (who is basically a glorified vendor) can come in an errect a garrison.


192 posted on 02/20/2006 1:25:21 PM PST by pacelvi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 190 | View Replies ]

To: n-tres-ted

I believe the UAE company was awarded the management operations and security contract for the ports.


194 posted on 02/20/2006 1:29:56 PM PST by standingfirm
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 190 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson