Why dockworkers are concerned about automation – To some degree, there are safety gains that can be gained through automation, but unions are also rightly concerned about [the] loss of jobs.
https://finance.yahoo.com/video/dockworkers-unions-demands-ahead-port-153807319.html
3 Comments
From the article
>Szakonyi tells Yahoo Finance, “The International Longshoremen’s Association has been very strong against any kind of automation on the East and Gulf Coasts. You have a degree of what they so-called call semi-automation at certain rail facilities, but they’re definitely trying to hold the line.”
>He explains the fight for protections against automation is “something that we’re seeing across any unions working in Western economies in which they’re pushing back. To some degree, there are safety gains that can be gained through automation, but unions are also rightly concerned about [the] loss of jobs. Really, I think in this wage discussion, it’s much, much more about salary.”
>Experts indicate that the length of the strike will determine the severity of the supply chain disruption. Szakonyi says, “We see both sides as being pretty dug in. We reported that US employers have tried to make overtures to the ILA about 10 times since June, [but] no luck there. [The] ILA has been very fierce with its rhetoric.”
>He expects “it’s going to come down to most likely [the Biden administration stepping in](https://finance.yahoo.com/video/why-port-strike-could-slippery-142644735.html) and while they have said that [they have no plan to invoke Taft-Hartley](https://finance.yahoo.com/news/the-politics-of-a-potential-port-strike-150038833.html), would break up, or at least put a freeze on the deal and continue to get cargo moving through the port, that calculation might change. The costs are going to ramp up,” with Morgan Stanley estimating the cost could have a $45 billion impact per day.
Unions should be worried. All of their power comes from collective bargaining, and if employers can automate most of them out of a job, their leverage is kneecapped.
In our system, when jobs go away, incomes go down because workers lose wages.
That doesn’t really make sense.Â
Jobs are eliminated when machines get more efficient. Efficient machines, in theory, should be producing more goods for less labor.
More goods means consumers need more income to buy those goods.
So why let incomes fall through lost wages?
We should be using UBI to supply incomes above and beyond what wages happen to pay out. It should increase every time the economy gets more productive.