From the article: More about the dispute in this NY Times article (archive link). ... ...
From the article:
The bankruptcy filing was precipitated by a massive damage award and ongoing litigation in a long-running dispute between ILWU Local 8, the union chapter in Portland, Oregon, and terminal operator ICTSI Oregon.
In November 2019, a jury found that the union had engaged in unlawful practices in 2013-2017, including work stoppages, slowdowns, “safety gimmicks” and other coercive actions.
After a 10-day trial, the jury awarded $93.6 million in damages to ICTSI, which, if enforced, was expected to push the ILWU into bankruptcy. The jury found that ILWU National was responsible for 55% of ICTSI’s damages, and Local 8 was responsible for 45%.
In March 2020, Oregon District Judge Michael Simon dramatically reduced the amount due, ruling that damages should not exceed $19.1 million.
For decades, the International Longshore and Warehouse Union has solidified its power with aggressive demonstrations of solidarity across its Pacific ports.
That includes a series of actions beginning in 2012, when dockworkers in Portland, Ore., introduced a slowdown, at least in part to protest two positions they believed should be going to the union’s members. The company operating the port went to court, contending that the job actions that continued for years were illegal and financially destructive.
Seven years later, a federal jury has agreed, awarding the company a stunning $93.6 million judgment.
...
The jobs that the I.L.W.U. wanted were being managed directly by the Port of Portland, and the company operating the port contended that the slowdowns over those positions improperly punished them for a dispute that should have been between the port and the I.L.W.U.
With much of the economy now involving a mesh of companies interacting with one another in layers of contracting and subcontracting, especially in sectors such as the construction and logistics industries, it is not just the I.L.W.U. that could face consequences as a result of the ruling, Professor Lichtenstein said.
“It shows the unworkability of the prohibition on secondary boycotts in a world of fissured employment, of supply chains, of the gig economy,” he said.
...
For nearly 40 years, the reefer work had been performed by port employees who were unionized electrical workers and not part of the I.L.W.U. And the terms of the company’s lease with the port called for them to remain employed by the port, ICTSI lawyers argued.
With no resolution to the standoff, ICTSI said in its claim, union workers began engaging in work stoppages, slowdowns and safety gimmicks to pressure the company to try to get the jobs from the port, when the port alone should have been the target of their protests. The company said it suffered as a result, ultimately abandoning its operations at the port. In the lawsuit, it sought damages as high as $135 million.
From the article:
More about the dispute in this NY Times article (archive link).
...
...