Longshore workers nearly defeat master contract; Federal suit filed to rerun election after widespread violations

Printer-friendly version of this pageSend by email

Longshore workers, get all the news: SUBSCRIBE to Union Democracy Review!

An aggressive grassroots campaign by reformers in the International Longshoremen's Association nearly succeeded in defeating a master contract covering 15,000 East and Gulf Coast longshore workers. The ILA reported that the contract had passed by a margin of 55% to 45% with about 9,000 members voting in the June 8 referendum. But opponents allege serious misconduct and are calling for a revote on what they say is a concessionary agreement.

In July, they filed suit in federal court after the union ignored calls for investigation, refused to hold a revote, and signed the six-year agreement with the employer association.
The near-defeat of the contract was a huge boost for ILA reformers who have been campaigning for democracy and against union corruption. "This is the first time in ILA history that we have had such a narrow contract vote. We consider it a major victory," said Leonard Riley, a reform leader and member of ILA Local 1422 in Charleston, South Carolina. "This is part of a bigger fight to reform our union. We want a strong and democratic union, free from corruption."

The strong no vote was also a blow to an embattled top ILA leadership which boasted before the vote that the contract was the "best ever" negotiated for its members. The union also faces a likely RICO suit brought by the Department of Justice to remove mob influence. The ILA has a long history of mob influence; two international officers were recently indicted on racketeering charges. (See our Question and Answer on a possible ILA RICO suit.)

Contract opponents, who are loosely organized as Concerned ILA Members (CILAM), charged that the master agreement perpetuates and deepens a multi-tier wage and benefit system that leaves many longshore workers with low pay and reduced health and pension benefits.

Although they campaigned hard against the contract, contract opponents were surprised by the high turnout and the extent of the opposition to the contract, which they attribute to deep discontent over the two-tier wages system. In some ports the contract went down overwhelmingly.

Grassroots campaign

Many activists in Concerned ILA Members are also part of the Longshore Workers Coalition, a reform caucus that has been pressing for greater democracy in the union since it was founded out of the Charleston Five battle in South Carolina in 2000. Since then, the LWC has developed a large network of contacts and activists in most major ports.

It was that network which formed the backbone of their effort, enabling them to caravan up and down the coast campaigning against the contract and bolstering opposition.
In May, members of the Hampton Roads, VA local had yet to receive copies of the contract and were unaware of a campaign against it. When contract opponents from New Jersey, Baltimore, Delaware, and South Carolina converged there a few weeks before the vote members responded enthusiastically. "We didn't know anyone else was against it," one of them told a member from the port of New York/New Jersey. Hampton Roads members later rejected the contract by a margin of 1,225 to 218, with an 85% turnout.

CILAM used the internet, posting its flyers and campaign literature at its website (www.ilarankandfile.org), allowing contract opponents to download and distribute them in their ports.

Lawsuit charges irregularities and violations

The voting was marred by widespread misconduct, enough, alleged the opponents in their lawsuit, to call into question the validity of the outcome.

The most serious violation occurred in a Jacksonville, Florida local with 1,000 eligible members. Only 93 cast ballots because members were not given proper notice of the vote and then were given only two hours to vote instead of the 12 required by the International.
In New Jersey Local 1235, a union representative is alleged to have ripped ballots from contract opponents' hands while Albert Cernadas, a local president and an International Vice President, looked on.

In Lake Charles, Louisiana - a local with a history of hiring-hall discrimination - members were not notified of the vote until the night before and the vote was reportedly held in a climate of intimidation.

Contract opponents are represented in their lawsuit by former AUD executive director Susan Jennik, who filed the action in federal court in New York City where the union is headquartered. The suit charges that the ILA has retaliated against one of the plaintfiffs, Darryl Payne, a business agent from the Jacksonville local because he spoke out against the contract, protested the botched voting there, and exercised his legal right to "participate in this legal action" seeking justice. The allegations in the lawsuit are supported by ILA members from several locals.

After the vote, members and officers wrote to ILA president John Bowers demanding that the union refrain from signing the contract, investigate their charges, and conduct a revote if necessary.

"We are appalled at the ILA's strategy of imposing an information blackout," said Rick Cephas, of ILA Local 1694 in Wilmington, Delaware. "The contract was forced through without real information or enough time for discussion - the current one doesn't even expire until September 30."

"We will continue to reach out to everyone who is dissatisfied with the contract and the voting process," said another ILA member who participated in the caravan to Hampton Roads. "This was not just a contract vote-it was a vote for real change in this union."

(Marsha Niemeijer is on staff with Labor Notes.)

For the Concerned ILA Rank-and-File website
For the Longshore Workers Coalition, a longstanding reform group in the ILA.

Links to Longshore worker websites