Section Front Front Page |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| By MICHAEL R. McKAY | |
|
The agreement I signed July 31 with Captain Tim Brown, president of the International Organization of Masters, Mates and Pilots, and International Longshoremen's Association President John Bowers ends a seemingly eternal jurisdictional dispute that had stood between AMO and the MM&P for more than 20 years. Competing claims to deck officer jobs on two cable ships and some tankers led the MM&P (the Marine Division of the ILA) to file a "raiding" complaint through the ILA with the American Federation of Labor-Congress of Industrial Organizations, which imposed sanctions on our union (then District 2 MEBA-AMO) under Article XX of the AFL-CIO Constitution. The ships and jobs at issue are long gone to both unions, but the sanctions remain. The AMO-MM&P agreement could change that. One clause calls for the MM&P and the ILA to "immediately notify" the AFL-CIO that agreement has been reached and to "advise" the AFL-CIO that AMO should no longer be considered in "non-compliance" with the findings of the labor federation's "impartial umpire" in the cable ship and tanker cases. The agreement does not address the specific issues that arose or the respective cases made by the two unions during the now-moot dispute. Lifting the sanctions could clear the way for AMO's reaffiliation with the AFL-CIO through direct charter or merger or affiliation with an AFL-CIO union. AMO became an independent union in 1994 when it withdrew not from the AFL-CIO, but from the National Marine Engineers Beneficial Association. Some people outside AMO have difficulty understanding the distinction, but that is another topic for another time. If AMO were to merge or affiliate with an AFL-CIO union at some point, the union AMO aligned with would not risk fallout from lingering penalties on AMO. The agreement states: "AMO should be free to affiliate with the AFL-CIO without the threat of any sanctions being imposed on any AFL-CIO affiliate that agrees to affiliate AMO." The AMO-MM&P agreement does not provide for merger or affiliation. It simply acknowledges the mutual wish for "a harmonious fraternal realtionship" between two unions with more in common than in contrast. Both AMO and the MM&P represent licensed seagoing professionals. Each union has weathered the steep and steady decline of the active privately owned and operated U.S.-flagged merchant fleet since the end of World War II. Each has felt the impact of competition from low-cost foreign-flagged merchant fleets, especially those flying flags of convenience. Each has endured fierce competition for jobs under Military Sealift Command and Maritime Administration charter. Each has fought--often side-by-side--on Capitol Hill and in the Executive Branch to promote the U.S. merchant fleet in foreign and domestic trade. And each has experienced aggressive encroachment by hostile third parties. Under the agreement, AMO and the MM&P will help each other through any licensed manpower shortage that may develop. A member of one union can accept a job on a ship under contract to the other union in the interests of keeping the ship working and protecting the jobs of all officers and crew members aboard the vessel. In such cases, the benefit funds administered by the short-handed union would "pass through" all benefit contributions to the funds of the other union. Membership dues would also be subject to "pass through" in these situations. Equally important is the agreement's provision renewing each union's commitment to the "tripartite agreement" under which AMO, the MM&P and MEBA agreed to provide uniform total labor costs to employers bidding on government charters under MSC and MARAD Requests for Proposals, or RFPs. Under the tripartite agreement, competitive bloodletting is left to the ship operators--charter awards are not determined almost exclusively by the level of sacrifice reached by each of the three officers' union. Unfortunately, MEBA appears to have lost interest in the tripartite agreement, which had been supported in the past by MEBA's latest president. If MEBA someday decides it wants a place at this particular table once again, AMO and the MM&P will do what they can to make the important tripartite agreement work as intended. As MM&P Secretary-Treasurer Glen Banks explained, the AMO-MM&P agreement "opens the door for the three officers' unions to work together for the benefit of the industry and our members." Meanwhile, AMO and the MM&P will cooperate on matters of mutual interest and concern. For example, we will work together to thwart a new effort by Hawaii Congressman Ed Case to strip non-contiguous states and territories from Jones Act jurisdiction. The Jones Act issue affects both unions immediately--the MM&P has a collective bargaining agreement with Matson Navigation, a container carrier that operates between the mainland West Coast and Hawaii, and AMO has a contract with Interocean Ugland, which operates a fleet of roll-on/roll-off ships between Washington State and Alaska for Totem Ocean Trailer Express and two Sea Star Line roll-on/roll-off ships in the U.S.-Puerto Rico trade. One TOTE ship, the Great Land, is to be time-chartered to Matson in Hawaiian service (with AMO aboard in all licensed positions). Left unchecked, the Case initiatives could lead to wider assaults on the domestic shipping law. No matter what the issue, no matter what the case, a threat to either of the two unions will be viewed as a threat to the other, and it will draw a common response. In my view, the AMO-MM&P agreement is long overdue. It is a logical result of increasingly cordial personal and professional relationships between our unions and an expression of mutual respect, and it will serve the AMO and MM&P memberships well. |
|
|
|
Front Page
|
|