Timber, I'm have no reason to disparage PMA for my compensation. It is fair, I only wish more working people enjoyed the compensation that I receive. The problems I have with PMA are not with my compensation, unless its there misrepresentation of it. What is considered middle class has certainly not kept up with inflation over the last 30 years.

Hank, in regard to the "work safe" issue. There are several reasons production is down, I've went into a few of them previously. I can tell you that due to the layovers impacting the hours that I'm available to work. I only worked 4 shifts (33 hours) last week and production was normal on all of them. On the day I serviced truck drivers for the gate operation, there was almost zero wait time. Production was down however, because the gate was not accepting exports. The instructions I have received from my leadership several times in the last couple months is as follows. "Do your job. Do not go rogue,do not do anything stupid, do not lose your cool, because that is what the employer wants. Leave the contract to your leadership and your negotiating committee."

The current full scale wage is $35.68 and I would be very surprised if anyone had a problem with the proposed wage increase as presented.

I've never received guarantee pay, its not really possible in most ports. It is real in very small ports that do not see much work, but even the smaller ports have been seeing more work in the last few years. These small ports maintain a very small membership 8 or 10, and many of them choose to travel to other ports for work instead of collecting the guarantee.

I have 12 years of seniority and I receive 3 weeks of vacation. We do not have sick leave, for the record(not complaining).

I've posted on the pension before. It is a great and generous benefit. The amount given is for those with 40 years of uninterrupted service. With pensions, the question always is. Will it be there when I retire?

The mechanic issue was negotiated in the 08 contract in exchange for language the PMA wanted on automation. Some PMA member companies sold their chassis to leasing agents and the leased them back to avoid the maintenance. This backfired when the leasing companies ran out of chassis, stranding cargo and leading backups that are ongoing. The reason it was a big issue again is because of the arbitrator in question.

When I saw the employers version of the arbitration issue, I thought there is no chance this would stand in the way of a deal. I wasn't aware of the issue, because it had been playing out in So Cal. The way the arbitration system is set up is as follows. There are four regional arbitrators covering WA, OR, N. Cal, and So. CAl. There is a coast arbitrator that handles appeals. The four regional arbitrators are picked, 2 by the employer and 2 by the union. They are supposed to rule based on the language in the contract. When there are true gray areas its understood that the 2 are probably going to see through the eyes of the employer, and the other 2 the union. However, its very important to the credibility of the system that all 4 are fair. This one arbitrator has not been, in fact over 50% of his rulings have been overturned by the coast arbitrator. The irony is that he was one of the unions picks.

So why is this such a big deal? It gives the employer a 3-1 advantage
in the arbitration process, and of the 3 he is the most biased in favor of the employer, and its not close. It often takes months for the coast arbitrator to overturn his decisions, at which point the damage has already been done, sometimes irreparably. His decisions have nullified gains in job jurisdiction that were given in exchange for language on technology and automation that will cost jobs in other areas. This was language PMA said they had to have. We compromised and we got burned, not by the language, but by the arbitrator. From the unions position it doesn't matter what the contract says, if we arbitrate in front of this guy we lose. Now, consider that most of the work is in his region.

We don't want the right to terminate arbitrators that rule against us. We want to repick our arbitraitor, because the one we have isn't satisfying the most fundamental requirement of the job. Which is fairness.

The employers have admitted that there is a problem with the arbitration process. They just don't want to do anything about it, because it couldn't be going better for them.

How important is it to the PMA? 46 ships and counting at anchor and 4 2/3 of the last 5 days with no ship work. All over letting us repick our choice of arbitrator. Hmm, is this guy important to them? Don't think too hard thats a tough one.