Councilman Tim McOsker introduced a motion Tuesday calling for a report on the impact that driverless cargo handlers at a terminal in the Port of Los Angeles will have on labor hours and on the environment.
According to McOsker’s office, the port is responsible for one in 13 jobs in the city, but longshore workers throughout the nation continue to be “wrongfully threatened” with losing their jobs to environmentally sustainable automation technology.
McOsker wants answers after hearing that the electric cargo handlers at one of the port’s terminals may be fueled by diesel. His motion instructs port officials to report in 30 days to the council’s Trade, Travel and Tourism Committee.
“We do not need to choose between protecting the environment or the workforce, and course corrections on climate change should not be at the expense of good union jobs,” said McOsker, who represents the 15th District, including the Port of LA in San Pedro.
“But if it turns out that Port of LA jobs were lost to automation technology on a false promise of environmental sustainability, that just adds insult to injury,” he added.
In 2019, the Board of Harbor Commissioners voted 3-2 to approve a permit for Maersk, a global logistics conglomerate, to introduce driverless electric cargo handlers inside its facility at the port. Part of Maersk’s transport and logistics business unit, APM Terminal’s Pier 400, is one of the largest single proprietary terminals in the world, according to McOsker’s office.
The Los Angeles City Council stepped in and voted to deny the permit to begin the process of automating operations at the APM terminal.
Shortly afterward, the International Longshore and Warehouse Union — the union representing dockshore workers — and the Pacific Maritime Association — the group representing industry leaders — entered into an agreement with APM to proceed with the program.
Under this plan, APM would deploy up to 130 driverless cargo handlers to shuttle containers from the docks to drayage trucks and rail, establish a workforce training program for ILWU members who work at the terminal, and pursue efforts to employ those workers.
According to McOsker’s office, at the time, Maersk declined to say how many jobs would be affected by replacing current cargo carriers with the unmanned vehicles, as well as indicate what other jobs at its terminals were likely automated.
It was argued that while some jobs would be replaced, the electric cargo operation would replace diesel-powered vehicles and save an estimated 2.2 million gallons of diesel fuel per year, which could lead to a “dramatic improvement” in air quality for the residents of Wilmington and San Pedro.
“In 2019, thousands of community and union members attended public meetings protesting the plan to automate,” Board of Harbor Commissioner Vice President Diane Middleton said in a statement. `
“I stood as a no vote, yet the Board of Harbor Commissioners narrowly approved Maersk’s permit to install battery chargers,” Middleton continued. “Maersk was up front about the fact that these automated driverless machines would not increase production but were being installed to lower labor costs by eliminating hundreds of longshore jobs daily. They also said that electric chargers would promote the goals of the Clean Air Action Plan. However, it appears that the only promise Maersk kept was to cut jobs.”
A recent tour of the APM site indicated that the electric cargo handler installation and operation at the terminal are possibly in violation of the agreed-upon plan for Pier 400, and resulting in possible harm to the environment and the workforce, according to McOsker’s office.
The issue was brought up by Middleton last week during the Harbor Commission meeting.
According to the South Coast Air Quality Management District, the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach are the largest in the nation as well as the single largest fixed source of air pollution in Southern California. The Port of Los Angeles has been working toward a goal of zero emissions.