An impasse in negotiations over an expiring contract has dockworkers readying for a strike that could leave containers piling up at ports along the East and Gulf Coasts, force cargo ships to sit in harbors, and scramble routes for agricultural goods at a critical time for farmers.
Members of the International Longshoremen’s Union (ILA) are poised to strike as early as Oct. 1, amid a halt in discussions with the United States Maritime Alliance (USMX), an association representing container carriers, marine terminal operators and port associations stretching from Boston to Houston.
At present, negotiations appear to be at a standstill.
Union leaders say they're dissatisfied with USMX’s latest offer of wage increases, employer retirement contributions and higher starting salaries. USMX is willing to continue current health care coverage and commit to not using fully automated terminals, though it still wants to allow some semi-automated equipment if both parties can agree on appropriate workforce protections and staffing levels.
ILA President Harold Dagget, meanwhile, has called for royalties on containers, health care improvements and complete bans on automation and semi-automation.
Nearly 300 union delegates have unanimously supported the idea of striking across the eastern seaboard if a satisfactory deal is not struck. 
Mike Steenhoek, Soy Transportation Coalition
“Mark my words, we’ll shut them down Oct. 1 if we don’t get the kind of wages we deserve,” Dagget vowed in a recent video.
While an early October strike would hit during peak harvest season, Soy Transportation Coalition Executive Director Mike Steenhoek believes it would only have a limited impact on Midwestern corn and soybeans that travel down the Mississippi River to Gulf Coast ports for export. Most such grain is stored in bulk and can be easily loaded and unloaded into ships' cargo holds, which somewhat limits the need for dockworkers.
Goods that are shipped in steel containers will take the brunt of the impact. Containers carrying frozen meats, farm machinery, produce and other grocery items could be left on ships or docks with no one to move them. A small percentage of soybean and other grains are transported in containers, too.
Poultry was the largest U.S. agricultural export sent by container through 14 major East and Gulf Coast ports, according to an Agri-Pulse analysis of USDA data. Raw cotton, animal feed, soybeans and meat followed.
Bananas were the top agricultural import product brought through these 14 ports, followed by beverages, grocery items, fruit and wine.
It’s easy to be “in the know” about what’s happening in Washington, D.C. Sign up for a FREE month of Agri-Pulse news! Simply click here
Around 44% of pork exports transported by ship in 2023 was sent through East or Gulf Coast ports, U.S. Meat Export Federation Vice President for Communications Joe Schuele told Agri-Pulse. Only around 29% of ocean-bound beef exports is shipped through these ports, but some, including Houston, still handle large quantities of the product.
If containerized shipping at East and Gulf Coast ports were to stop, agricultural shippe
Peter Friedmann, Agriculture Transportation Coalitionrs would have two options: find places to safely store farm products or reroute them to ports along the east coast. Both come with costs, said Agriculture Transportation Coalition Director Peter Friedmann.
“It’s never smooth,” he told Agri-Pulse. “It’s always painful, it’s always expensive, it’s always disruptive to move agriculture from one port to another.”
Schuele said some meat exporters are preparing for a strike by rerouting products to West Coast ports. But sending an influx of products through these ports could create congestion, he added.
Traffic-halting events like strikes always come with greater risk to agricultural products than other types of goods due to their perishable nature, Friedmann said. For example, if produce gets stuck on ships or at docks without adequate cold storage, it could spoil.
Meanwhile, if agricultural exports are held up, farmers will be forced to sell their products within the U.S. But domestic markets can absorb only so much additional product before prices tumble. These impacts would come swiftly in a strike, he added.
“It’s not a gradual deterioration of pricing,” Friedmann said. “It’s dramatic, especially when you’re doing it right during the harvest. It’s the worst time.”
A strike could “really cause some economic havoc,” said Arkansas Republican Rep. Rick Crawford, who sits on the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. But there’s not much Congress can do to avert one, he added.
“All we can really do is watch 
Rep. Rick Crawfordand hope that cooler heads prevail because in this case, Congress doesn’t have any authority,” Crawford told Agri-Pulse.
A potential port strike would not only come at an inopportune time for farmers, but also for politicians. An early October strike would come just a month before November elections, elevating to the national spotlight an issue that could weigh down candidates' campaigns.
Some power to intervene does lie with President Joe Biden, who can seek an injunction against strikes or lockouts that “imperil the national health or safety” through the Taft-Hartley Act. The power was once utilized by Republican George W. Bush to reopen 29 West Coast ports after a 2002 lockout.
Agriculture industry groups were among 177 business organizations that on Tuesday asked Biden to step in to avert the strike, either by brokering a quick deal or keeping ports open while negotiations continue.
But acting to avert a strike could be criticized as anti-union, a label Democrats in particular seek to avoid, noted Friedmann.
“The Democrats have made it very clear that they are not inclined to ever use it,” Friedmann said of the power to stop a strike. “So that’s off the table for this current strike threat.”
For more news, go to www.agri-pulse.com.
